Janette Murray-Wakelin's raw food testimony

Betty14

Hello everyone,

                          yesterday I came across a news story about a lady that was diagnosed with a very aggressive type of bc and was told she only had 6 months to live. She set out to prove her prognosis wrong and is still alive, a decade later to tell her story. I'm linking part of her story here. If you google her name I'm sure you will find a lot more info about her. I'm very interested in hearing about your impressions so please don't hold back on your opinions thanks.

http://rawcancure.com/janette%27sstory.html

  I'm at odds as to how I feel about this story. My first concern is that nothing is mentioned about her tumour other than it was initially 3 cm.......what about now.....is it completely gone? Has she had any further tests to determine what her status is atm? Don't get me wrong, I am all for positive outcomes and am quite happy to rally behind a miracle cure as long as it doesn't mislead people. I just can't help feeling that this is just another out of focus ghost photo.

   My honest truth is that I want to believe this lady's story....we all need hope. If her raw food diet can cure bc then it most likely cure other diseases too. I guess I'm posting this here because I'm wondering if I should go raw....perhaps not all the way but somewhat. It can't hurt to up my intake of raw veggies and fruits. I'm not the world's most disciplined person...I'm a chocoholic.

  I'm really looking forward to hearing your opinions....thank you all so much:)

Monis

Since I was DX'd I've been doing a lot of reading about nutrition.  I found a couple of great books by Kris Carr, "Crazy Sexy Cancer" and "Crazy Sexy Diet".  She advocates a vegan diet, which emphasizes balancing the pH levels in your body.  I am still in the process of reading and learning about this way of eating, but her books really explain the science behind the thinking in a simple and fun way.  My biggest challenge will be how to cook for the family - My husband and son have no interest in eating this way 

Happythoughts100

I agree with you bettylovestress.  I too was fascinated when I saw the news story today (01.01.14) about Jeanette Murray Wakelin and her 366 consecutive marathon runs around Australia.  I searched various articles to read further about what surgery, treatment if any, she had in regards to her breast cancer and so far, all I have read is about the couple's businesses, and the exciting life they have led which has all been fascinating reading but no answers to my many burning questions. Currently I am going through chemo after a double mastectomy with the last chemo due on the 7th Januuary.  Personally I have found this treatment to be very debilitating and I am looking for guidance on how to best to look after my body before starting radiation and naturally, post radiation.  i have to admit that Jeanette Murray Wakelin, and her husband are pure inspiration! What an incredible story!  What an incredible achievement! Congratulations to both!  

ziggypop

I did a little research. It's important for people to know what chemo and rads are. Both are generally (not always but generally) given as prophylactic measures. So lets take a basic case:

1) Biopsy shows cancer. Whether there are lymph nodes involved is unknown. Size of biopsied tumor is about 3 cm.

2) Surgery is done, 3 cm tumor is removed, some lymph node involvement is found & these lymph nodes are removed, it is also believed based on the position of the tumor that their may be spread to the chest wall. 

This is the position that JMW was in - she had surgery; the known cancer was removed. This is actually the position that most people are in following surgery - be it a lumpectomy, a mastectomy, a bilateral mastectomy , a SNB, an AND, etc. That is, most of the time the surgeons go in and excise all of the cancer that can be found (sometimes you have an inoperable cancer & that's not possible, but this is the general course of events). Basically at this point, unless scans show evidence of cancer, the patient is considered cancer free. 

The question is - Why have chemo, or rads, or hormone therapy? After all, they just got rid of all of the known cancer in your body. So what do the doctors consider before recommending chemo, rads, etc. Well they think about the probability that some cancer cells traveled via the lymphatic system out to other locations in your body & are out there waiting to divide & turn into tumors in your bones or liver or brain. If cancer cells were found in your lymph nodes, then they figure that this probability is relatively higher.

Then they consider that the cells can also invade tissue locally - like into the chest wall or around those lymph nodes - or that there might be some cells around that primary tumor site that they didn't get.

So they figure a 'risk' - because they don't want to give chemo if it's unlikely that it's necessary to do so, or rads. (that why many people who have BC don't have chemo or rads). 

The risk isn't 100% (generally - unless the KNOW there are cancer cells there & even then some small amount of cells of any kind can die out on their own). The risk in this instance isn't zero by any means. In a case like this you might say the risk is 90% that there ARE cancer cells either locally or distally and without treatment the risk of death from breast cancer over a 10 period is 85% with no further treatment.  

Now if this person has treatment and survives, we can't say for sure that the chemo or the rads cured her because 15% of the time she would have lived anyway. 

We also can't say that if this person ate a vegan diet, juiced, and took supplements, that those things cured her, because there's a 15% chance she would have survived anyway. 

What we CAN say is this:

IF 100 women in this situation have chemo and rads then out of those 100 women, the odds say that 50 (instead of 15) will survive at least 10 years. 

We can NOT say that about a vegan diet or any other alternative treatments. 

It would actually be easy and cheap to do a comparison study - just take the first 100 women with diagnosis  who use a specific alternative treatment and follow them for 10 years & see how many die (of BC) each year of a 10 year period, follow the first 100 women at any major hospital during the same period who use conventional treatment. 

Why if alternative practitioners believe that their methods work, don't they do this? Many of them have more than enough money to fund such a study. 

This JMW seems like a nice woman & thank goodness that this disease didn't kill her - but it's highly unlikely that it's anything she did - she just happened to be one of the lucky ones who's cancer was completely excised.  

  

Happythoughts100

Thank you ziggpop for your informative and balanced post.  I have found that faced with a life threatening disease puts an incredible amount of pressure, stress and self doubt upon my thinking which interferes with my previously logical mind. However your comments have brought a reasoned and balanced approach which once again, I thank you for.  

Betty14

Thanks Monis,

                       those books look like a good read....shall look into it further.:D

Betty14

Hey happy,

                  I'm so glad that someone else shares my curiosity about this story. I too am very inspired and it's because of it that I am hungry for more information. Even without the bc cure this story makes for a fascinating read. Thanks for your sharing your thoughts happy:)

Betty14

  Hey Ziggypop,

                            Your theory makes perfect sense to me. I was actually thinking along similar lines as far as the operation.....I figured they must have removed the mass at least. I found your view on survival rates very interesting. You're right, there is no proof to show what actually cured her....it could be one thing or a series of things. I'm going to file this story in my 'miracles do happen sometimes' folder. Thanks Ziggy:)

SelenaWolf

You have to keep in mind, as well, that she may have been one of those women who would have achieved "curative effect" after surgery, which means that it wouldn't have mattered what she ate or drank, she still would have done well whether- or not she chose conventional- or alternative treatments.

I think that she, definitely, helped improve her overall health by eating better, but I don't think her diet "cured" her.  Having the surgery was the key event in her outcome.

Momine

Ziggy and Selena have made good points. I looked up a couple of articles about this woman, and from the description it sounds like she had a stage 3 cancer. Why she would be told she had only 6 months to live with a stage 3 cancer is quite confusing. I see she has a book on the market, and unfortunately it is not uncommon for author/survivors to exaggerate the badness of their initial prognosis.

ziggypop

Momine - I wondered about that too. I can't imagine any oncologist giving somebody a six month prognosis with the conditions that she had - the articles I read did say the cancer was 'very aggressive' but even so - I don't think a six month prognosis is given unless one has mets and even then only under certain conditions. I wouldn't necessarily jump to the conclusion of 'exaggeration' or at least purposeful exaggeration - in all the confusion of an initial diagnosis we often mishear things. A doc could have said something like - "Once the cancer metastasizes, without treatment, the prognosis is six months." (I'm trying to give her the benefit of the doubt). 

bettylovestress - Conventional doc stress certain things about diet & exercize - a good amount of fruits and veggies is at the top of that list , fish and poultry yes but not too much red meat or carbs. As to chocolate - I see that you are er+, the main thing with that is that you want to maintain a healthy weight (hopefully on the lean side), this is because fat cells produce estrogen & so if you have an abundance of them, there's more estrogen produced. That doesn't mean don't eat chocolate. Cancer places a lot of extra burdens on our lives - we certainly shouldn't allow it to unnecessarily take away the pleasures we enjoy. : )   

Beesie

"Cancer places a lot of extra burdens on our lives - we certainly
shouldn't allow it to unnecessarily take away the pleasures we enjoy."

I agree!  

As for the story, obviously a well balanced nutritious diet and exercise is good for our overall health.  And for some of us (but we don't know which of us), it might slightly reduce our risk of recurrence or the development of a new primary breast cancer.  But what I always think about when I see articles like this are all the women on this board who ate the healthiest of diets and were in the best possible physical condition, and yet still developed breast cancer. I'm sure that there are women on a raw food diet who've developed breast cancer.  And I'm sure that there are women who have followed a regime similar to Janette's who have not had the success she's had.

So I never take any of these types of articles or stories too seriously.  I'm glad that Janette is doing well.  If she believes it's because of the diet, great, although I do find it interesting that she's turned this into a lifestyle and seems to be using her story to support herself.  Personally, I figure her success probably has more to do with the fact that she is one of the many women for whom surgery alone was curative.

percy4

I agree.  When I got this, my daughter pointed out that she has a friend who "cured" herself (after surgery) from having to have chemo, doing an alkaline diet.  I think, too, that a great diet/lifestyle lends itself to a better outcome for just about everything.  Still; I don't believe it changes cancer cells, ultimately.  Interestingly, I have seen that sometimes people who are diagnosed with any condition start to take such good care of themselves that they feel better than before.  And I am one of the ones who really investigated the value of rads, etc.  Didn't want the poison. Having looked at the facts, however, I will be doing rads.  Maybe even Arimidex (looking into it).  Messed up how when you question each step, the docs think you are unwilling.  Not true; I am just checking.  Yes; I will eat a better diet, exercise more, and do all I can to have good health.  But I will not depend on it for curing cancer.

ziggypop

Yep - the big mistake is thinking that because the cancer did not return after surgery that X (substitute whatever you want in this slot - including conventional treatments) are what 'cured' it, because there are times when the surgery itself takes care of it. 

The difference is that there are statistics available for how many woman with particular types of cancer survive for (Y number of years) with conventional treatments and no such stats are available for any other treatments - coffee enemas,tumeric, etc etc.etc.

I was tested positive for hepatitis  many years ago - three tests confirmed that I had been exposed to hep  because I had the antibodies - and all the docs told me was that I tested positive for Hep C. A couple years ago, I had a different test & it turns out that I am one of the very lucky 15% of people whose antibodies actually kill off the virus completely - meaning I do not have Hep C. It's very doubtful that it was anything that I did that cleared the disease. I just got lucky.

Percy - you should tell your daughter that your body regulates and restores its Ph balance whatever food you eat. What you eat doesn't change the alkalinity of your blood or organs.  

percy4

Glad to hear it.  The diet to become "alkalized" doesn't sound like too much fun, and I need some fun, right now.  I will be preparing myself a lovely dinner of linguini with a lemon, caper, and butter sauce, and putting into that a few huge, lightly seared sea scallops, and complementing that with a nice (1) glass of wine (my ER+ status is only weak-moderate, so, fine, the wine).  Then, I am going to watch the continuing Downton Abbey third Season, which is being shown again all over PBS in anticipation of Season 4 starting this coming Sunday.  Sometimes, you have to feed the soul. xx

ziggypop

Now THAT sounds like a lovely meal and a nice evening all around. I seriously don't think that we should give up things we enjoy (good food for instance) because we have cancer - that's just like adding another symptom to the disease.

percy4

Amen. xx

 

MelissaDallas

Hell Percy, the vegan, nonsmoking, nondrinking, skinny marathon runners here got breast cancer too. Eat your dinner & drink your wine!

percy4

Love you, girl.  Thanks for all the great info/support you've given me. xx

MusicLover

Hi Betty, Thanks for posting this.  Being recently dx with stage IV bc I have been desperately looking for a "cure" and making myself pretty crazy.  I just paid for a consultation with Chris Wark.  He claims to have been cured naturally by doing a raw food diet also.  He is truly a nice guy but I came to the same conclusion that his cancer was cut out of him, he was stage 3 and they suggested months of chemo which he refused and he did a raw food diet in place of it and has been cancer free for 10yrs.  There is a woman on our board (Janice54) with stage IV who went vegan the day after dx and has been NED for 7yrs only on tamoxifen.  I hope her story is true but one never knows and people can be cruel.  My opinion is that I have nothing to loose and everything to gain if this raw food diet works.  If I was stage 0, I would be enjoying every glass of wine, every food that I truly love and you absolutely should! But as for me, I want to try anything and everything that will help me extend my life.  Dr. Schulze's is another believer in the raw food diet, I am just hoping that there is something to it.

MusicLover

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/raw-enthusiasm-drives-janette-murraywakelin-to-marathon-record-20131122-2y1np.html

The tumor was surgically removed but removal of the lymph nodes is not mentioned.

SelenaWolf

Percy4... I'm seriously drooling.

Rubiayat

After I found out I had bc I started desperately researching different diets, supplements, etc. There does seem to be consensus that a healthy diet is important, but does it need to be raw? Is a healthy diet the magic bullet? My husband has celiac disease and we did the GAPS diet to help his intestine heal. During that diet I started making a lot of raw food - it was wonderful and I felt great. However, it took so much time! After diagnosis I was determined to eat more raw and cut out all the foods I have sensitivities to, but it was difficult. It seemed there was so little I could eat, food prep took more time and energy than I had with working full time, taking care of a child, and being depressed/anxious/stressed about breast cancer. I finally came to the conclusion that the stress of trying to have an optimal diet (not sure what that even is though) was probably canceling out the benefits.

My coworker just recommended the book, "radical remission" by Kelly Turner. I haven't read it yet, but my understanding is that she reviewed thousands of cases and interviewed over a hundred cancer patients who had been in remission for many years. She found 9 common themes among all of them. Diet was one, but there were other things like increasing positive emotions and embracing social support. 

The day I found out I had a suspicious mammogram was the same day I heard my friend died from breast cancer. She was triple negative, refused surgery, and took a completely alternative path. She did eat all organic and raw, meditated, took supplements, etc. I wish she would have had surgery....you just don't know. Please know I am not discounting her approach, I think it helps illustrate that there is no one answer. 

Musiclover, if I was stage IV I think I would be going raw too. You are right, you have nothing to lose. There is a raw restaurant in Berkeley, Cafe Gratitude, I have been to several times. The food is amazing! They sell a cookbook (or rawbook:) ) with their most popular recipes. Maybe this would be helpful and inspiring to you on your raw food journey:

http://www.amazon.com/Am-Grateful-Recipes-Lifestyle-Gratitude/dp/1556436475

teembee

I have just finished reading Janette Murray-Wakelin's book published 2013 and, although jumping in late to this post, can clarify some questions about her bc prognosis, as reported in her book. She had a golf ball size tumour that was removed without complication and 9/23 lymph nodes present were affected. The cancer was described as highly aggressive and she had "..numerous smaller tumours scattered throughout the chest wall, too many and over too wide an area to remove".

I have found parts of her book to be informative and have decided to become more active in my own diet, which is fairly healthy at any rate but not 'radically' so.  I certainly enjoy, and will continue to do so, certain 'treats' that I might be better off without, but as far as I am concerned, are important 'soul food'. Still, there is possibly something to take away from this book if you view it from "both sides".

 

 

MusicLover

Hi Teembee, Does Janette describe her juice fast in her book? I just watched her interview with Chris Wark and she states that she did the Breuss Juice fast for 42 days.  I would imagine that she would talk about this in her book.  (I would buy her book but honestly, I have bought so many darn cancer books that I am a little worn out from it all right now.  She also states that she was a stage 3 but she says it very hesitantly in the interview, does she give her stage in the book? Thank you for the info.

(I want to mention that I think Janette is extremely likeable and I think she is truly trying to help others.)