Non-Mainstream Therapies: Are You Curious? Skeptical? Grateful?

ruthbru

Dark chocolate (at least 70% cocoa) IS actually good for you!

1. Dark Chocolate is Very Nutritious

It contains a decent amount of soluble fiber and is loaded with minerals.

A 100 gram bar of dark chocolate with 70-85% cocoa contains:

• 11 grams of fiber.
• 67% of the RDA for Iron.
• 58% of the RDA for Magnesium.
• 89% of the RDA for Copper.
• 98% of the RDA for Manganese.
• It also has plenty of potassium, phosphorus, zinc and selenium.

2. Dark Chocolate is a Powerful Source of Antioxidants

Dark chocolate is loaded with organic compounds that are biologically active and function as antioxidants. These include polyphenols, flavanols, catechins, among others.

One study showed that cocoa and dark chocolate contained more antioxidant activity, polyphenols and flavanols than other fruits they tested, which included blueberries and Acai berries.

3. Dark Chocolate May Improve Blood Flow and Lower Blood Pressure

The flavanols in dark chocolate can stimulate the endothelium, the lining of arteries, to produce Nitric Oxide (NO), which is a gas .

One of the functions of NO is to send signals to the arteries to relax, which lowers resistance to blood flow and therefore reduces blood pressure.

There are many controlled trials showing that cocoa and dark chocolate can improve blood flow and lower blood pressure (the effects are usually mild, but heck it's worth a try!).

4. Dark Chocolate Raises HDL and Protects LDL Against Oxidation

Consuming dark chocolate can improve several important risk factors for heart disease.

In a controlled trial, cocoa powder was found to significantly decrease oxidized LDL cholesterol in men. It also increased HDL and lowered total LDL in men with elevated cholesterol .

Dark chocolate can also reduce insulin resistance, which is another common risk factor for many diseases like heart disease and diabetes.

5. Dark Chocolate May Lower The Risk of Cardiovascular Disease

The compounds in dark chocolate appear to be highly protective against the oxidation of LDL. In the long term, this should cause much less cholesterol to lodge in the arteries and we should see a lower risk of heart disease over the long term.

In a study of 470 elderly men, cocoa was found to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death by a whopping 50% over a 15 year period. Another study revealed that eating chocolate 2 or more times per week lowered the risk of having calcified plaque in the arteries by 32%. Eating chocolate less frequently had no effect .Yet another study showed that chocolate 5+ times per week lowered the risk of cardiovascular disease by 57%.

(These 3 studies are observational studies so can not prove that it was the chocolate that caused the reduction in risk.)

6. Dark Chocolate May Protect Your Skin Against The Sun

The bioactive compounds in dark chocolate may also be great for your skin. The flavonols can protect against sun-induced damage, improve blood flow to the skin and increase skin density and hydration.

7. Dark Chocolate May Improve Brain Function

One study of healthy volunteers showed that 5 days of consuming high-flavanol cocoa improved blood flow to the brain.

Cocoa may also significantly improve cognitive function in elderly people with mental impairment. It also improves verbal fluency and several risk factors for disease .

Cocoa also contains stimulant substances like caffeine and theobromine, which may be a key reason cocoa can improve brain function in the short term.

So here you go;  a complimentary treatment I believe we can all endorse!!!

labelle

I'm definitely on board with that. A serving of 90% dark chocolate has only 3 g of sugar, less than most fruits. Even for those of us who avoid sugar, a little very dark chocolate now and again is an acceptable treat-well, it is for me anyway!

ruthbru

I eat 1-2 ounces of 90% cocoa dark chocolate every day. If I want a treat, I get some 70% (which seems sweet to me after the 90%).

cp418

annika - some people have a hard time with capsule form of Vitamin D. My nutritionist told me to use Biotics Research Bio-D-Mulsion Forte brand which is liquid drops. It has worked well for me to stay between 60-70 range. I must take at least 4000 units daily or my levels go back down. During winter months I will take 5000-6000 units daily.

Momine

Labelle and others, I completely agree about the dark chocolate. Thankfully there is also a lot of back-up for the idea that coffee, in moderation, is good for you.

Mombie, that sounds like a really good set-up. I had weekly lymphatic drainage massage after my surgery. Classic lymphatic drainage massage is, by the way, entirely "alternative" in the sense that no studies or investigations have established if or how it works. It is, all the same, the standard of care for preventing or treating lymphedema. My onc refers you if you show signs of a problem, but I have told him several times since that ALL his patients should be sent as a matter of course. Not because they all need lymphatic drainage, but because it is a gentle, relaxing and pleasant treatment and will help your mental state immensely, even if your lymph system is working just fine.

cp418

I really enjoy a piece of dark chocolate. Thanks ruthbru - now I certainly will not be guilty of indulging in this pleasure!

OT - I had 18 nodes removed and had painful issues with cording. I did all the stretching exercises in the hot shower but I still feel using my arm and being active helped. I have horses and they still required daily care despite my treatments. I feel my emotional, mental and physical well-being was greatly benefited by those little escapes in the barn hugging my horse. The time I spent brushing them using my surgical arm side IMO greatly helped me from a therapy recovery perspective. So far, I've never had any issues with this arm.

annika12

Thank you cp418 I will try that brand. Im on another liquid one and have also had the prescription 50000 ui that only bumped me from 24 to 28 Dark chocolate I can do great when my sweet tooth gets a hold of me !!!!

ruthbru

I eat 3 Viactiv calcium chews a day. Each has 500 mg calcium, 500 IU of vitamin D, & 40 mcg vitamin K. This wouldn't be enough if you are severely deficient; but if you just need a boost, it is a nice way to get it because the chew tastes like a piece of candy (15 calories)...a caramel  flavored one goes nicely with my medicinal dark chocolate.

Momine

cp418, I agree about using the arm. In the end, muscle working is the only thing that moves lymph around, so it makes sense to me that staying active helps. I have found the same thing.

I also agree that animals help in various ways. Again, I doubt my dogs can cure cancer (although they can smell it), but they definitely helped me remain active during treatment and improved my mental state.

ruthbru

Even though I had been using my arm all along after surgery/rads etc., I know I was unconsciously 'babying' it. It wasn't until the next summer, when I took a family vacation and spent a lot of time swimming, bobbing, playing in the ocean, doing things with my arm without thinking about it, that I really think it started to heal and regain true strength and range of motion (plus, I think salt water is very therapeutic).

Animals are wonderful therapy! They get your mind off yourself, get lots of unconditional love, laughs, and they can drive you crazy (in a good way). Right when I was finishing treatment, a little one pound stray kitten showed up on our doorstep. I think she was my angel cat, because she sure helped me move forward.

 

MombieZombie

Momine--Yes, it's a pretty good treatment center. I'm not in a very big city, but people flock to this place rather than go all the way to Seattle because of the good reputation and comprehensive services. I forgot to mention that there is also an onsite lymphedema therapist as well. It is routine for all breast cancer patients to be sent to her for evaluation, massage and physical therapy whether you have symptoms or not. I didn't have lymphedema, but I had ropes of scar tissue in my arm and limited movement (as many of us do)--she helped me regain full movement and got rid of the scar ropes. I am a human Gumby, so I was happy to regain my accustomed agility. She will be seeing me after my rads are done, to make sure that no further damage results. I love the little exercises she gave me to do at home. They really help. Our oncology massage therapist is a separate person and she is specially trained for the gentle massage techniques for cancer patients, like you mentioned. I had my doubts at first. I couldn't understand how such gentle massage could be beneficial, but the first day I went for treatment was the BEST day I had had in a long time. The stress relief was amazing! I will be going to her every three weeks for stress relief because I have developed PTSD in all of this mess.

I love all this talk about dark chocolate.

Ruthbru--That's sweet about the animals--especially the kitten showing up at the right time. I love cats, but I am unfortunately allergic to most animals. However, you have a good point in general about the therapeutic benefits of doing things that serve and interact with another being. I am currently reading The Definitive Guide to Thriving After Cancer. One of the steps for whole health existence is to find ways to serve others--reaching outside yourself. I have always believed in that, whether it be people, animals, or both, even with plant-life actually. Caring and serving is a healing activity. The book came recommended by my Naturopath.

ruthbru

Sounds like a great book & a great philosophy. I will have to check it out!

exbrnxgrl

Need I say that I am a great supporter of dark chocolate and furry friends?

MombieZombie

But not furry chocolate though. LOL

exbrnxgrl

LOL! That would be awful and a terrible waste of chocolate

MombieZombie

So true, but it made you giggle and laughter is good medicine too. I was helping to keep you healthy. LOL

exbrnxgrl

Yes! I truly believe laughter is the best medicine. Thank you

MombieZombie

I meant to add this in my first post, but I forgot. Gals that are on chemo drugs/treatments that are heart-damaging, I'm sure you know that CoEnzymeQ10 is a recommended aid for protecting the heart--our oncs and our complementary med teams agree on this in my area. However, I learned that there are a percentage of people whose DNA cannot process and absorb this supplement effectively. There is an expensive test you can get to see if you are among that percentage, or you can just spend a little extra money to take CoQ10 in the Ubiquinol form. It's a form that apparently anyone can absorb. (My sources are internet based and backed by my Naturopath who spent a number of years specializing his profession with Cancer Centers of America.) I haven't had time to read every post in this thread, so I hope this is helpful and not redundant. (Going to read all soon--lots to learn.) I'll gladly share the type and brand if anyone is interested.

placid44

I use coq10 to help with neuropathy I still have post taxol. My onc told me not to take any antioxidants during chemobecause they can interfere with it/make it less effective.

MombieZombie

You are right. I was told the same thing about antioxidants. I wasn't allowed to take ANY other antioxidant except that one. Herceptin is often so damaging that they won't take the risk of not doing the Q10 throughout the chemo and year of herceptin. It may not be so critical to take Q10 with other chemo regimens. Even with the Q10 my heart has suffered. My onc made me promise to take it. It has been a real balancing act, but I know it has helped me. I can tell when I miss a dose. Since you brought up this important detail--I will add that I believe NO ONE should try using Q10 without consulting a professional, because of how it could interact or interfere with something you are already prescribed to take. Thanks for helping me clarify.

placid44

Sure thing. It is all so confusing. I only got through by listening to the docs but questioning them, too, which turned out to be important a couple of times

MombieZombie

I like your style.

gemini4

Thanks for starting this thread -- lots of traffic here! :-)

I went all "conventional" with treatments but had been researching complementary alternative treatments from the moment of diagnosis. I practiced Qi Gong during rads, which really helped my energy level. I used only aloe and calendula creams on my skin during rads (I tossed out a huge tub of Cerave cream after seeing it contained parabens). I've gotten acupuncture treatments for help with hot flashes and general well-being.

I was taking both DIM and turmeric for a while, but conflicting reports that I have been reading as to whether or not they interfere or enhance the effectiveness of tamoxifen have made me decide to stop taking them. I do enthusiastically eat turmeric when possible (it's delicious on cooked spinach with black pepper and ghee). I've also switched to a primal/paleo diet (which seems to be "alternative" in that it eschews the "conventional wisdom" of a low-fat, grain-heavy diet). I make cauliflower about three times a week, since it is a great starch substitute, and it also happens to be a good source of indole-3-carbinol (which becomes DIM).

I do take without hesitation supplements of vitamin D3 and biotin. (Edited to add:). I also have started to take a magnesium supplement called "natural calm" -- it's a powder that I drink with water before bed. Really helps with muscle cramping, and it's a nice gentle laxative. I've been reading so many great things about how important and beneficial magnesium is. I also enjoy soaking in a hot bath with Epsom salts.

I get regular exercise but need/want to add strength training. My main focus is my diet right now -- reducing excess body fat (fortunately I need to drop just a dress size, but it's still a slow process), avoiding sugar (I'm getting by just fine on berries and a piece or two of fruit each day) and any food that causes inflammation. I still drink wine and the occasional cocktail in moderation. I do drink two to three cups of coffee a day (I read a study saying coffee enhanced tamoxifen's effectiveness!) -- coffee makes me feel good, and I suffer no ill effects from it (stomach issues, agitation,etc).

I have given up sugar (besides fruit) for Lent. Even though I know a dark chocolate bar could have less sugar than some fruit, I have still been abstaining. On Easter Sunday I am looking forward to have a really high-quality dark chocolate bar! Maybe a fancy artisan one crusted with sea salt or espresso beans. I'll be shopping for it this week. :-)

SelenaWolf

There is a huge difference between belief and fact. A belief represents the confidence in the truth of something that may not be susceptible to rigorous proof. In order to believe in something, one must have faith and trust in that something. One can have the conviction that something is true and believe in it so wholeheartedly that - for them - it is truth.

There are varying degrees of belief, but most of them are deeply influenced by culture, faith, morality, values, and personal experience. That doesn't mean that these things are wrong, but it does mean that belief - in its very essence - can rarely stand up to critical analysis and is, by its very nature, biased. It cannot be measured or quantified; it is a viewpoint not anchored in fact or other evidence, therefore, it cannot be disproved in a rational manner. Belief exists in varying degrees, but it is - essentially - inarguable.

A fact is something that has been proven to exist or that has happened. It is truth, as well, but it is not a truth based on belief, but one that is based on actual observation and critical study. Fact is belief backed up by proof and can be verified, over and over again. The truth of a fact is beyond argument because it has undergone rigorous scrutiny and is quantifiable. Fact stands alone and is not influenced by belief, bias, context or prejudice. It can be tested, contested, verified or disproved solely on the basis of itself. Fact either stands the test of study or it is not fact.

The very nature of scientific study is one of critique. Belief isn't enough. Even opinion based on known facts isn't enough. One must be able to prove one's theory by establishing fact and this can only be done by rigorously weeding out bias. Sometimes by weeding out bias, one finds that one's theory is, actually, disproved or completely unsupportable given the known evidence. In this sense, belief becomes bias and, if the results of the study are to have any merit at all, then belief has to be suspended and fact accepted.

This is why there will always be a clash between alternate and conventional. And this is why those of us who support conventional, but remain interested in alternative (or complementary) will always ask for proof and will critique the source regardless of whether it is alternative or conventional. There is nothing inherently disrespectful in this. We need more than belief, we need fact. There is nothing disrespectful in encouraging debate, analyzing sources, identifying bias, suggesting other sources, and pointing out fallacy. This is what critical assessment is based on.

Is belief better than fact? Or is fact better than belief? Can belief or fact change? This will ALWAYS be a bone of contention between alternative and conventional and I get that. Alternative and belief/viewpoint will always clash with conventional and scientific/proof. And we've hashed this philosophical difference through a bazillion times on this board and there have been some spectacular blow-ups. However, those of us who do support scientific/proof but remain interested developments in alternative want - NineTwelve is attempting to do and which I support wholeheartedly - a thread where we CAN debate, critique, contest, and scrutinize any- and all available data and brainstorm the information. This is not a lack of respect of someone else's viewpoint; this is a discussion of the available facts (or lack thereof) and their interpretations. It's a purely intellectual (and, sometimes, philosophical) exercise as we attempt to understand more about things that we hope might have merit. A disagreement over facts does not mean an attack on one's sense of belief; it's a disagreement over the information. Because we support scientific/fact and remain skeptical (but hopeful) about alternative treatment, does not mean that we reject alternative outright; we just want to see MORE. We question conventional as deeply as we question alternative, which helps us remain open to changes in the scientific landscape and better informed.

“Believe what you like, but don't believe everything you read without questioning it."

~Pauline Baynes, "Questionable Creatures: A Bestiary"

cp418

I need an icon with clapping hands! Applause!!

Momine

What the redhead said

WinningSoFar

Right on.

DivineMrsM

What an excellent post, Selena! So many good points!

"There is a huge difference between belief and fact. A belief represents the confidence in the truth of something that may not be susceptible to rigorous proof. In order to believe in something, one must have faith and trust in that something. One can have the conviction that something is true and believe in it so wholeheartedly that - for them - it is truth.

There are varying degrees of belief, but most of them are deeply influenced by culture, faith, morality, values, and personal experience. That doesn't mean that these things are wrong, but it does mean that belief - in its very essence - can rarely stand up to critical analysis and is, by its very nature, biased. It cannot be measured or quantified; it is a viewpoint not anchored in fact or other evidence, therefore, it cannot be disproved in a rational manner. Belief exists in varying degrees, but it is - essentially - inarguable.

A fact is something that has been proven to exist or that has happened. It is truth, as well, but it is not a truth based on belief, but one that is based on actual observation and critical study. Fact is belief backed up by proof and can be verified, over and over again. The truth of a fact is beyond argument because it has undergone rigorous scrutiny and is quantifiable. Fact stands alone and is not influenced by belief, bias, context or prejudice. It can be tested, contested, verified or disproved solely on the basis of itself. Fact either stands the test of study or it is not fact.

The very nature of scientific study is one of critique. Belief isn't enough. Even opinion based on known facts isn't enough. One must be able to prove one's theory by establishing fact and this can only be done by rigorously weeding out bias. Sometimes by weeding out bias, one finds that one's theory is, actually, disproved or completely unsupportable given the known evidence. In this sense, belief becomes bias and, if the results of the study are to have any merit at all, then belief has to be suspended and fact accepted.

This is why there will always be a clash between alternate and conventional. And this is why those of us who support conventional, but remain interested in alternative (or complementary) will always ask for proof and will critique the source regardless of whether it is alternative or conventional. There is nothing inherently disrespectful in this. We need more than belief, we need fact. There is nothing disrespectful in encouraging debate, analyzing sources, identifying bias, suggesting other sources, and pointing out fallacy. This is what critical assessment is based on.

Is belief better than fact? Or is fact better than belief? Can belief or fact change? This will ALWAYS be a bone of contention between alternative and conventional and I get that. Alternative and belief/viewpoint will always clash with conventional and scientific/proof. And we've hashed this philosophical difference through a bazillion times on this board and there have been some spectacular blow-ups. However, those of us who do support scientific/proof but remain interested developments in alternative want - NineTwelve is attempting to do and which I support wholeheartedly - a thread where we CAN debate, critique, contest, and scrutinize any- and all available data and brainstorm the information. This is not a lack of respect of someone else's viewpoint; this is a discussion of the available facts (or lack thereof) and their interpretations. It's a purely intellectual (and, sometimes, philosophical) exercise as we attempt to understand more about things that we hope might have merit. A disagreement over facts does not mean an attack on one's sense of belief; it's a disagreement over the information. Because we support scientific/fact and remain skeptical (but hopeful) about alternative treatment, does not mean that we reject alternative outright; we just want to see MORE. We question conventional as deeply as we question alternative, which helps us remain open to changes in the scientific landscape and better informed."

exbrnxgrl

Selena,

!!!

NineTwelve

Thanks, SelenaWolf. I have borrowed your words and quoted them in the original post (hope that's okay).

And thanks to all of you who have posted. I highly respect the intelligence and courage of the followers of alternative healing. I hope nothing they may find in this thread will cause them to feel hurt, insulted, or singled out. I believe most of us, whichever side we're on (or straddling the middle), would still be able to sit down with each other for a cup of tea and a chat, and we would find things to agree on, like cancer sucks, and we need a cure.

But I want to discuss the pros and cons of things like vitamins, exercise, saunas, acupuncture, the whole gamut of therapies and lifestyle changes available. I promise to always try to be respectful of others, and I have faith in my BCO sisters, that they will, too.