<!-- google_ad_section_start -->*What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *<!-- google_ad_section_end -->
Health Forums

Go Back   Health Forums > Cancer > Breast Cancer > alt.support.cancer.breast

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-08-2008, 06:08 PM
Ilena Rose
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default *What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *

http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
Health Lover

*What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *

Dear Friend,

Scientists have discovered a new way of testing for breast cancer that
could make the mammogram a thing of the past—and it's about time. The
test could potentially be far more accurate than the old-school
mammograms—not to mention much safer. If this catches hold in the
medical community, women can say goodbye to those breast- smashing
vise grips. Now, all they'll have to do is open wide and say, "Ahh."

U.S. scientists are developing a breast cancer screening test that
checks a woman's saliva for evidence of the disease. They say they've
identified 49 proteins in saliva that can actually distinguish healthy
women from those with benign breast tumors and those with malignant
breast tumors.

According to Charles Streckfus, a professor at the University of Texas
Dental Branch at Houston, "Breast cancer triggers a change in the type
and amount of proteins in the secretions from the salivary glands."
And sure enough, when the researchers tested a group of 30 women – 10
healthy, 10 with benign tumors, and 10 with malignant tumors – the
protein patterns were found to be different in all three groups.

If this is true, it could finally put an end to what I've considered
the most dangerous method of breast cancer screening: the mammogram.
Yes, in spite of the many multimedia pushes encouraging women to get
mammograms as early as possible, it's long been my belief that these
tests have been doing more harm than good.

The reason? What I call "compression syndrome."

Very simply, severe compression of the breast (such as the kind that
occurs during a mammogram) can lead to microscopic tissue ruptures –
even in the tissue of the tumor. This tear can actually create a
"leak"

in the tumor, which allows the malignancy to spread and cause an
acceleration of the cancer—and an earlier death.

Every doctor knows that breast lumps should be handled with a great
degree of care, because handling them roughly could cause such a
rupture. It's something that's drilled into your head in med school
(or at least it was back in my day).

And any woman who has experienced a mammogram knows that it squashes
the breast pancake-flat until it hurts—hardly what I'd call
"handling with care."

Of course, the researchers say that more tests need to be done before
saliva screening test based on these findings can become common and
widely available. My old friends at the FDA have to weigh in on the
subject, and we all know how quickly they move. Streckfus said they
would seek the government's approval for the saliva test in the next
five years.

So let's say, worst case, it takes the full five years for the
approval to be sought. How long do you think it'll take the FDA to get
around to actually approving this potentially life-saving test? Three
years? Six?

Ten? Depends how much money the researchers have to put into political
coffers, I suppose.

It's maddening that we live in an age when science can move at a
breakneck pace, but our tired, dusty government system is still locked
in the days of the horse-and-buggy.

Wouldn't this simple – and surely affordable – spit test solve so many
problems? What woman wouldn't sign up to take this screening even in
her early 30s, just to be sure— especially when it's known that
early detection is the key to survival in the war against cancer.

Help me get the word around about this saliva screening. Maybe we can
help enough political juice to get the test approved sooner rather
than later.

So mad about mammograms and the FDA that I could spit,

William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-08-2008, 08:20 PM
Ilena Rose
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: *What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *


John Gohde, using perfect Quack Logic, queries:

"I do not spit. Does that make me safe? "


http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
Health Lover

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/Snake-oil.htm

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-09-2008, 12:10 AM
Peter Moran
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: *What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *

"Ilena Rose" <BIA@mundo.com> wrote in message
news:c36pq3pbgq5c8qclffeiv93j43cr3a9hij@4ax.com...
> http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
> Health Lover
>
> *What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *
>
> Dear Friend,
>
> Scientists have discovered a new way of testing for breast cancer that
> could make the mammogram a thing of the past-and it's about time. The
> test could potentially be far more accurate than the old-school
> mammograms-not to mention much safer. If this catches hold in the
> medical community, women can say goodbye to those breast- smashing
> vise grips. Now, all they'll have to do is open wide and say, "Ahh."
>
> U.S. scientists are developing a breast cancer screening test that
> checks a woman's saliva for evidence of the disease. They say they've
> identified 49 proteins in saliva that can actually distinguish healthy
> women from those with benign breast tumors and those with malignant
> breast tumors.
>
> According to Charles Streckfus, a professor at the University of Texas
> Dental Branch at Houston, "Breast cancer triggers a change in the type
> and amount of proteins in the secretions from the salivary glands."
> And sure enough, when the researchers tested a group of 30 women - 10
> healthy, 10 with benign tumors, and 10 with malignant tumors - the
> protein patterns were found to be different in all three groups.
>
> If this is true, it could finally put an end to what I've considered
> the most dangerous method of breast cancer screening: the mammogram.
> Yes, in spite of the many multimedia pushes encouraging women to get
> mammograms as early as possible, it's long been my belief that these
> tests have been doing more harm than good.
>
> The reason? What I call "compression syndrome."
>
> Very simply, severe compression of the breast (such as the kind that
> occurs during a mammogram) can lead to microscopic tissue ruptures -
> even in the tissue of the tumor. This tear can actually create a
> "leak"
>
> in the tumor, which allows the malignancy to spread and cause an
> acceleration of the cancer-and an earlier death.
>
> Every doctor knows that breast lumps should be handled with a great
> degree of care, because handling them roughly could cause such a
> rupture. It's something that's drilled into your head in med school
> (or at least it was back in my day).
>
> And any woman who has experienced a mammogram knows that it squashes
> the breast pancake-flat until it hurts-hardly what I'd call
> "handling with care."
>
> Of course, the researchers say that more tests need to be done before
> saliva screening test based on these findings can become common and
> widely available. My old friends at the FDA have to weigh in on the
> subject, and we all know how quickly they move. Streckfus said they
> would seek the government's approval for the saliva test in the next
> five years.
>
> So let's say, worst case, it takes the full five years for the
> approval to be sought. How long do you think it'll take the FDA to get
> around to actually approving this potentially life-saving test? Three
> years? Six?
>
> Ten? Depends how much money the researchers have to put into political
> coffers, I suppose.
>
> It's maddening that we live in an age when science can move at a
> breakneck pace, but our tired, dusty government system is still locked
> in the days of the horse-and-buggy.
>
> Wouldn't this simple - and surely affordable - spit test solve so many
> problems? What woman wouldn't sign up to take this screening even in
> her early 30s, just to be sure- especially when it's known that
> early detection is the key to survival in the war against cancer.
>
> Help me get the word around about this saliva screening. Maybe we can
> help enough political juice to get the test approved sooner rather
> than later.
>
> So mad about mammograms and the FDA that I could spit,
>
> William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.



Other tumour markers have been found useless in screening for breast cancer.
Unless a screening method can pick up breast cancers that are a few mm in
size and carcinoma-in-situ, as mammography can, then few lives are going to
be saved. I predict that this method will also not prove accurate enough
in terms of false positives and false negative results to be used as a
stand-alone screening method. If it does have any accuracy, it may find a
place in evaluation of persons with doubtful lesions on mammography or MRI
or whatever else evolves as the best type of imaging for screening.

PM

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-09-2008, 01:46 AM
J
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: *What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *

Peter Moran wrote:

> "Ilena Rose" <BIA@mundo.com> wrote in message
> [...]
> > Help me get the word around about this saliva screening. Maybe we can
> > help enough political juice to get the test approved sooner rather
> > than later.


> > So mad about mammograms and the FDA that I could spit,
> >
> > William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.

>
> Other tumour markers have been found useless in screening for breast cancer.
> Unless a screening method can pick up breast cancers that are a few mm in
> size and carcinoma-in-situ, as mammography can, then few lives are going to
> be saved. I predict that this method will also not prove accurate enough
> in terms of false positives and false negative results to be used as a
> stand-alone screening method. If it does have any accuracy, it may find a
> place in evaluation of persons with doubtful lesions on mammography or MRI
> or whatever else evolves as the best type of imaging for screening.
>


Agreed . All that will do is create anxiety long before anything can be done
about it.
It's old news? and for Her2neu?
http://www.imaginis.com/breasthealth...ews4.10.02.asp

The Clinical trial? http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00579163
Ascertainment of Peripheral Blood or Saliva Samples for Genetic Epidemiology
Studies of Familial Cancers
Estimated Primary Completion Date: December 2008 (Final data collection
date for primary outcome measure)
Patients accepted for referral to the Cancer Family Clinic of the Department of
Medicine at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center are eligible for
participation in this study. Such patients should have a history of cancers of
the breast, ovary, colon, prostate, uterus, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, leukemia,
soft tissue sarcoma, endocrine neoplasms, or other malignancies presenting in
first degree relatives or in successive generations as part of a suspected
cancer family syndrome.

The device has not been designed yet. (according to the official website -
below)
They are building a microfluidics platform to analyze the saliva
http://publicaffairs.uth.tmc.edu/med.../bc-saliva.htm
Then follows clinical trials.
Technology sells. The way I see it, getting it in headlines draws new customers
and.investors..
New buildings, research jobs.

Maybe you can sort out how these fit together, if they do.
J

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-10-2008, 10:12 PM
D. C. Sessions
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: No bras equals little or no breast cancer.

In message <bb359d20-3f96-48db-b892-9c9101fa6ec1@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, Mr-Natural-Health wrote:

> On Feb 8, 1:02 pm, Ilena Rose <B...@mundo.com> wrote:
>> http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
>> Health Lover
>>
>> *What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *

>
> Is it divine justice that what women are so preoccupied with growing
> up, ends up killing them later in life, or is it simply a Disease of
> Civilization resulting from that nasty Western habit women have of
> wearing tight fitting bras?
>
> Give up wearing bras, is my advice.
> http://cancer-jack.blogspot.com/2007...st-cancer.html


I'd advise you to tell that to my grandmother who never wore a bra,
except that she died seventy years ago from breast cancer.

--
| Bogus as it might seem, people, this really is a deliverable |
| e-mail address. Of course, there isn't REALLY a lumber cartel. |
| There isn't really a Santa Claus, but try www.santaclaus.com. |
+--------------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> --------------+
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-11-2008, 06:28 AM
David Wright
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: No bras equals little or no breast cancer.

In article <bb359d20-3f96-48db-b892-9c9101fa6ec1@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Mr-Natural-Health <zxcvb@naturalhealthperspective.com> wrote:
>On Feb 8, 1:02 pm, Ilena Rose <B...@mundo.com> wrote:
>> http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
>> Health Lover
>>
>> *What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *

>
>Is it divine justice that what women are so preoccupied with growing
>up, ends up killing them later in life, or is it simply a Disease of
>Civilization resulting from that nasty Western habit women have of
>wearing tight fitting bras?
>
>Give up wearing bras, is my advice.


Any time Gohde weighs in on a topic, you're well advised to be
suspicious. From

http://health.yahoo.com/breastcancer...on--21101.html

Myth 5: Wearing a bra or using antiperspirants and deodorants
increases your risk of breast cancer.
These are two Internet rumors that never seem to quit. It's not true
that wearing a bra, especially underwire bras, traps toxins by
limiting lymph and bloodflow in your breasts, increasing
risk. There's also no proof for the claims that antiperspirants and
deodorants cause cancer by keeping the body from sweating out the
cancer-causing substances that build up in the breasts, or because
they contain harmful chemicals that are absorbed through the skin.


I figure Gohde just likes braless women and is hoping to increase his
chances of seeing them.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"Without Bush, what will America's schoolchildren have to look down on?"
-- Bill Maher
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-11-2008, 01:49 PM
Carole
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: *What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *


"Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:13qpr8bchb60fc1@corp.supernews.com...
> "Ilena Rose" <BIA@mundo.com> wrote in message
> news:c36pq3pbgq5c8qclffeiv93j43cr3a9hij@4ax.com...
> > http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
> > Health Lover
> >
> > *What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *
> >
> > Dear Friend,
> >
> > Scientists have discovered a new way of testing for breast cancer that
> > could make the mammogram a thing of the past-and it's about time. The
> > test could potentially be far more accurate than the old-school
> > mammograms-not to mention much safer. If this catches hold in the
> > medical community, women can say goodbye to those breast- smashing
> > vise grips. Now, all they'll have to do is open wide and say, "Ahh."
> >
> > U.S. scientists are developing a breast cancer screening test that
> > checks a woman's saliva for evidence of the disease. They say they've
> > identified 49 proteins in saliva that can actually distinguish healthy
> > women from those with benign breast tumors and those with malignant
> > breast tumors.
> >
> > According to Charles Streckfus, a professor at the University of Texas
> > Dental Branch at Houston, "Breast cancer triggers a change in the type
> > and amount of proteins in the secretions from the salivary glands."
> > And sure enough, when the researchers tested a group of 30 women - 10
> > healthy, 10 with benign tumors, and 10 with malignant tumors - the
> > protein patterns were found to be different in all three groups.
> >
> > If this is true, it could finally put an end to what I've considered
> > the most dangerous method of breast cancer screening: the mammogram.
> > Yes, in spite of the many multimedia pushes encouraging women to get
> > mammograms as early as possible, it's long been my belief that these
> > tests have been doing more harm than good.
> >
> > The reason? What I call "compression syndrome."
> >
> > Very simply, severe compression of the breast (such as the kind that
> > occurs during a mammogram) can lead to microscopic tissue ruptures -
> > even in the tissue of the tumor. This tear can actually create a
> > "leak"
> >
> > in the tumor, which allows the malignancy to spread and cause an
> > acceleration of the cancer-and an earlier death.
> >
> > Every doctor knows that breast lumps should be handled with a great
> > degree of care, because handling them roughly could cause such a
> > rupture. It's something that's drilled into your head in med school
> > (or at least it was back in my day).
> >
> > And any woman who has experienced a mammogram knows that it squashes
> > the breast pancake-flat until it hurts-hardly what I'd call
> > "handling with care."
> >
> > Of course, the researchers say that more tests need to be done before
> > saliva screening test based on these findings can become common and
> > widely available. My old friends at the FDA have to weigh in on the
> > subject, and we all know how quickly they move. Streckfus said they
> > would seek the government's approval for the saliva test in the next
> > five years.
> >
> > So let's say, worst case, it takes the full five years for the
> > approval to be sought. How long do you think it'll take the FDA to get
> > around to actually approving this potentially life-saving test? Three
> > years? Six?
> >
> > Ten? Depends how much money the researchers have to put into political
> > coffers, I suppose.
> >
> > It's maddening that we live in an age when science can move at a
> > breakneck pace, but our tired, dusty government system is still locked
> > in the days of the horse-and-buggy.
> >
> > Wouldn't this simple - and surely affordable - spit test solve so many
> > problems? What woman wouldn't sign up to take this screening even in
> > her early 30s, just to be sure- especially when it's known that
> > early detection is the key to survival in the war against cancer.
> >
> > Help me get the word around about this saliva screening. Maybe we can
> > help enough political juice to get the test approved sooner rather
> > than later.
> >
> > So mad about mammograms and the FDA that I could spit,
> >
> > William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.

>
>
> Other tumour markers have been found useless in screening for breast

cancer.
> Unless a screening method can pick up breast cancers that are a few mm in
> size and carcinoma-in-situ, as mammography can, then few lives are going

to
> be saved. I predict that this method will also not prove accurate

enough
> in terms of false positives and false negative results to be used as a
> stand-alone screening method. If it does have any accuracy, it may find

a
> place in evaluation of persons with doubtful lesions on mammography or MRI
> or whatever else evolves as the best type of imaging for screening.
>
> PM
>


However, you can tell from your spit if your body is in an acidic state.
And it is the acidic condition which sets the stage for further disease down
the track.

http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/euroamerican3.htm
"TESTING THE INTERNAL MILIEU - URINE AND SALIVA TESTING
This old and simple test of urine and saliva was in use extensively before
modern blood tests came into existence. The amount of information it
provides is considerable and forms a basis that unites all forms of
medicine, makes them all work if you will. If the pH is not right, nothing
in the body works as well as it could, including all therapies; vitamins,
acupuncture, herbals.and allopathic drugs."

Carole
www.cellsalts.net


Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-11-2008, 10:49 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: *What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *


"Carole" <hubbca@iimetro.com.au> wrote in message
news:47b02dce$0$20214$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on.net> wrote in message
> news:13qpr8bchb60fc1@corp.supernews.com...
>> "Ilena Rose" <BIA@mundo.com> wrote in message
>> news:c36pq3pbgq5c8qclffeiv93j43cr3a9hij@4ax.com...
>> > http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
>> > Health Lover
>> >
>> > *What your spit can tell you about breast cancer *
>> >
>> > Dear Friend,
>> >
>> > Scientists have discovered a new way of testing for breast cancer that
>> > could make the mammogram a thing of the past-and it's about time. The
>> > test could potentially be far more accurate than the old-school
>> > mammograms-not to mention much safer. If this catches hold in the
>> > medical community, women can say goodbye to those breast- smashing
>> > vise grips. Now, all they'll have to do is open wide and say, "Ahh."
>> >
>> > U.S. scientists are developing a breast cancer screening test that
>> > checks a woman's saliva for evidence of the disease. They say they've
>> > identified 49 proteins in saliva that can actually distinguish healthy
>> > women from those with benign breast tumors and those with malignant
>> > breast tumors.
>> >
>> > According to Charles Streckfus, a professor at the University of Texas
>> > Dental Branch at Houston, "Breast cancer triggers a change in the type
>> > and amount of proteins in the secretions from the salivary glands."
>> > And sure enough, when the researchers tested a group of 30 women - 10
>> > healthy, 10 with benign tumors, and 10 with malignant tumors - the
>> > protein patterns were found to be different in all three groups.
>> >
>> > If this is true, it could finally put an end to what I've considered
>> > the most dangerous method of breast cancer screening: the mammogram.
>> > Yes, in spite of the many multimedia pushes encouraging women to get
>> > mammograms as early as possible, it's long been my belief that these
>> > tests have been doing more harm than good.
>> >
>> > The reason? What I call "compression syndrome."
>> >
>> > Very simply, severe compression of the breast (such as the kind that
>> > occurs during a mammogram) can lead to microscopic tissue ruptures -
>> > even in the tissue of the tumor. This tear can actually create a
>> > "leak"
>> >
>> > in the tumor, which allows the malignancy to spread and cause an
>> > acceleration of the cancer-and an earlier death.
>> >
>> > Every doctor knows that breast lumps should be handled with a great
>> > degree of care, because handling them roughly could cause such a
>> > rupture. It's something that's drilled into your head in med school
>> > (or at least it was back in my day).
>> >
>> > And any woman who has experienced a mammogram knows that it squashes
>> > the breast pancake-flat until it hurts-hardly what I'd call
>> > "handling with care."
>> >
>> > Of course, the researchers say that more tests need to be done before
>> > saliva screening test based on these findings can become common and
>> > widely available. My old friends at the FDA have to weigh in on the
>> > subject, and we all know how quickly they move. Streckfus said they
>> > would seek the government's approval for the saliva test in the next
>> > five years.
>> >
>> > So let's say, worst case, it takes the full five years for the
>> > approval to be sought. How long do you think it'll take the FDA to get
>> > around to actually approving this potentially life-saving test? Three
>> > years? Six?
>> >
>> > Ten? Depends how much money the researchers have to put into political
>> > coffers, I suppose.
>> >
>> > It's maddening that we live in an age when science can move at a
>> > breakneck pace, but our tired, dusty government system is still locked
>> > in the days of the horse-and-buggy.
>> >
>> > Wouldn't this simple - and surely affordable - spit test solve so many
>> > problems? What woman wouldn't sign up to take this screening even in
>> > her early 30s, just to be sure- especially when it's known that
>> > early detection is the key to survival in the war against cancer.
>> >
>> > Help me get the word around about this saliva screening. Maybe we can
>> > help enough political juice to get the test approved sooner rather
>> > than later.
>> >
>> > So mad about mammograms and the FDA that I could spit,
>> >
>> > William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.

>>
>>
>> Other tumour markers have been found useless in screening for breast

> cancer.
>> Unless a screening method can pick up breast cancers that are a few mm in
>> size and carcinoma-in-situ, as mammography can, then few lives are going

> to
>> be saved. I predict that this method will also not prove accurate

> enough
>> in terms of false positives and false negative results to be used as a
>> stand-alone screening method. If it does have any accuracy, it may find

> a
>> place in evaluation of persons with doubtful lesions on mammography or
>> MRI
>> or whatever else evolves as the best type of imaging for screening.
>>
>> PM
>>

>
> However, you can tell from your spit if your body is in an acidic state.
> And it is the acidic condition which sets the stage for further disease
> down
> the track.



lol

yikes what garbage...the "spit" of most of us is acidic...which has NADA to
do with setting the stage for further disease...it is necessary for the
beginning of digestion

so you are saying that simply test spit for acid...but avoid early detection
techniques...

well...I guess you could gargle with a base like sodium bicarb prior to
testing your spit...then ..voila...you are healthy for life

asif
>
> http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/euroamerican3.htm
> "TESTING THE INTERNAL MILIEU - URINE AND SALIVA TESTING
> This old and simple test of urine and saliva was in use extensively before
> modern blood tests came into existence. The amount of information it
> provides is considerable and forms a basis that unites all forms of
> medicine, makes them all work if you will. If the pH is not right, nothing
> in the body works as well as it could, including all therapies; vitamins,
> acupuncture, herbals.and allopathic drugs."
>
> Carole
> www.cellsalts.net
>
>



Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hiss, spit, hell, damn Molly alt.support.stop-smoking 9 01-19-2008 03:09 PM
Glenda's Story after Breast Cancer & Breast Implants Ilena Rose alt.support.cancer.breast 8 11-14-2007 03:25 AM
Glenda's Story after Breast Cancer & Breast Implants ..... Ilena Rose alt.support.cancer.breast 5 10-13-2007 03:59 PM
Breast MRI: Detects Cancers in the Opposite Breast of Women Newly Diagnosed with Breast Cancer sanwan alt.support.cancer 0 04-21-2007 06:06 AM
Decisions in the Dark ... excellent article on Breast Implants & Breast Cancer Ilena Rose alt.support.cancer.breast 0 12-15-2006 07:53 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0
     
   
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41