Adequate Vitamin D3 Could Prevent 600,000 Breast, Colon Cancer Cases
Cedric F. Garland, Dr.P.H., cancer prevention specialist at the Moores Cancer Center at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) and colleagues estimate that 250,000 cases of colorectal cancer and 350,000 cases of breast cancer could be prevented worldwide by increasing intake of vitamin D3, particularly in countries north of the equator.
Vitamin D3 is available through diet, supplements and exposure of the skin to sunlight.
New research shows vitamin D slashes risk of cancers by 77 percent; cancer industry refuses to support cancer prevention
By Mike Adams from Natural News
Exciting new research conducted at the Creighton University School of Medicine in Nebraska has revealed that supplementing with vitamin D and calcium can reduce your risk of cancer by an astonishing 77 percent. This includes breast cancer, colon cancer, skin cancer and other forms of cancer.
This research provides strong new evidence that vitamin D is the single most effective medicine against cancer, far outpacing the benefits of any cancer drug known to modern science. The study involved 1,179 healthy women from rural Nebraska. One group of women was given calcium (around 1500 mg daily) and vitamin D (1100 IU daily) while another group was given placebo. Over four year, the group receiving the calcium and vitamin D supplements showed a 60 percent decrease in cancers. Considering just the last three years of the study reveals an impressive 77 percent reduction in cancer due to supplementation. (The full press release of this study is included below.
It provides more details about the findings.) Note that these astonishing effects were achieved on what many nutritionists consider to be a low dose of vitamin D. Exposure to sunlight, which creates even more vitamin D in the body, was not tested or considered, and the quality of the calcium supplements was likely not as high as it could have been (it was probably calcium carbonate and not high-grade calcium malate, aspartate or similar forms). What does all this mean? It means that if you take high-quality calcium supplements and get lots of natural sunlight exposure or take premium vitamin D supplements (such as those made from fish oil), you could easily have a greater reduction than the 77 percent reduction recorded in this study.
American Cancer Society opposes vitamin D
This research on vitamin D is such good news that the American Cancer Society, of course, had to say something against it. An ACS spokesperson, Marji McCullough, strategic director of nutritional epidemiology for the American Cancer Society, flatly stated that nobody should take supplements to prevent cancer. If it seems surprising to you that the American Cancer Society — which claims to be against cancer — would dissuade people from taking supplements that slash their cancer risk by 77 percent, then you don’t know much about the ACS. In my opinion, the ACS is an organization that actually prevents prevention and openly supports the continuation of cancer as a way to boost its power and profits.
The ACS is the wealthiest non-profit in America and has very close ties to pharmaceutical companies, mammography equipment companies and other corporations that profit from cancer. Notice the name, too: It isn’t the American Anti-Cancer Society, it’s the American Cancer Society! What they really stand for is right in the name! 
Because ..
More than 60 epidemiology studies conducted over the last 30 years have indicated that Vitamin D deficiency is associated with an increased risk of more than 16 different types of cancer. Read this meta-analysis PDF.
And because..
A placebo controlled study has now confirmed these findings. In the group given vitamin D supplements the incidence of cancer was reduced by as much as 77% compared to patients who were given placebo (sugar pill) over a four year study period. See the research : Vitamin D and calcium supplementation reduces cancer risk: results of a randomized trial
And because..
The Incidence of cancer is reduced by 17% and the death rate from cancer by 29% for every 10ng/ml increase in the blood level of vitamin D. The effect is particularly strong for cancers of the gastrointestinal tract where the reduction in death rate was 45% for the same increase in plasma levels of vitamin D. See the research : Prospective study of predictors of vitamin D status and cancer incidence and mortality in men.
And because..
A Norwegian study showed that cancer patients diagnosed in the summer when vitamin D levels are highest had up to 40% better survival rates than patients diagnosed in the winter when vitamin D levels are at their lowest. See The research : Sun exposure and cancer survival in Norway: changes in the risk of death with season of diagnosis and latitude.
And because..
Breast cancer patients with low levels of vitamin D followed over eleven years had a 70% greater chance of dying and twice the rate of developing metastasis than patients with high levels of vitamin D. See the research : Frequency of vitamin D (Vit D) deficiency at breast cancer (BC) diagnosis and association with risk of distant recurrence and death in a prospective cohort study
And because..
Early stage lung cancer patients who were diagnosed in the summer and had the highest levels of vitamin D had a five-year survival of 73% compared to 30% for those diagnosed in the winter with low vitamin D levels. See the research : D levels predict survival in early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer patients.
And because..
High vitamin D levels (based on latitude and UV exposure) also correlate with a decreased risk of developing lung cancer, a 45% and 65% reduction in men and women respectively. Similar effects have been demonstrated in colon, prostate, renal and endometrial cancer. See the research : Could ultraviolet B irradiance and vitamin D be associated with lower incidence rates of lung cancer?
And because..
If you have had any form of skin cancer, excessive exposure to sunlight may be dangerous. However, a recent study in melanoma patients demonstrated that those patients with higher exposure to sun light had a reduced mortality from their condition
And because..
Dr Giovannucci of Harvard Medical School also published a review on the incidence and death rates from cancer in 47,800 men followed up as part of the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. In this population there were 4286 cases of cancer and 2015 deaths from cancer. After estimating the vitamin D levels of these participants, they able to correlate both the incidence of cancer and the death rate from cancer with vitamin D levels.
And because..
Maintaining adequate levels of vitamin D during winter months requires a daily dose of 20 micrograms, four times the current recommended dose, says a new study.
The study, led by Susan Sullivan from the University of Maine, has important implications for ongoing consultations on vitamin D recommendations, with the current level of five micrograms (200 International Units) seen by many as insufficient. More..
And because..
A prospective study in Finland showed that women with the highest levels of vitamin D had an 84% reduction in their risk of developing lung cancer. More..
And because..
The Canadian Cancer Society now recommends that the whole population of Canada take vitamin D supplements to reduce their risk of developing cancer.
$40 and a quick health survey allows everyone to
- get a vitamin D blood spot test kit to be used at home (except in the state of New York)
- have the results sent directly to them
- take action to adjust their own levels to get to the desired ranges with whatever help is needed from their healthcare practitioners.
Where to buy good quality Vitamin D at a good price :
The Vitamin D3 from Utopia Silver is about as good as it gets when it comes to price and the by-far preferred type of Vitamin D.
When you use a group discount code of LR001 it costs a mere $5.53 per bottle of 100 tablets of 5,000 iu Vitamin D3.
http://www.vitamind3world.com/Home.html
Read now the truth , only here in jmBBlog. According to the American Cancer Society Male : 47 % chance of getting cancer. Female : 38% chance of getting cancer. These numbers are far too large, and continue to grow, despite more than 70 Years of the War on Cancer
About the ACS: 
It is The World’s Wealthiest “Nonprofit” Institution With a current budget of $380 million. The American Cancer Society spends more than 52 percent of its budget on salaries, pensions, fringe benefits, and overhead for its own employees.
They have cash reserves that approach
$1 billion.
The American Cancer Society is, “More interested in accumulating wealth than in saving lives.” On every $1 spent on direct service, approximately $6.40 is spent on compensation and overhead. 16 percent or less of all money raised is spent on direct services to victims. The American Cancer Society: “Has a politics of prevention reflecting a virtually exclusive “blame-the-victim” philosophy.” The national Charities Information Bureau as recently stated that it, “does not know of any other charity that makes contributions to political parties.” It is fixated on damage control, diagnosis and treatment, and basic molecular biology, with indifference or even hostility to cancer prevention.
Foundation’s board of trustees included corporate executives from the pharmaceutical, investment, banking, and media industries.
A long history of failing the public:
In 1958 the ACS campainged AGAINST a law (Delaney Law) that banned deliberate addition to food of any amount of any additive shown to cause cancer in either animals or humans. In 1971, when studies unequivocally proved that diethylstilbestrol (DES) caused vaginal cancers in teenage daughters of women, the American Cancer Society refused an invitation to testify at Congressional hearings In 1978 the ACS opposed regulations proposed for hair coloring products that contained dyes known to cause breast and liver cancer in rats.
In 1983, the ACS refused to join a coalition of the March of Dimes, American Heart Association, and the American Lung Association to support the Clean Air Act. In 1992, the ACS issued a joint statement with the Chlorine Institute in support of the continued global use of organochlorine pesticides— despite clear evidence that some were known to cause breast cancer. In 1992, the ACS launched a ” chemoprevention” program aimed at recruiting 16,000 healthy women at supposedly ” high risk” of breast cancer into a 5-year clinical trial with a highly profitable drug called tamoxifen. Tamoxifen, had already been shown to be a highly potent liver carcinogen in rodent tests, and it was also well-known to induce human uterine cancer.
Cedric F. Garland, Dr. P.H., Sharif B. Mohr, M.P.H., Edward D. Gorham, M.P.H., Ph.D., and Frank C. Garland, Ph.D., of the Division of Epidemiology at the UCSD Department of Family and Preventive Medicine and Moores UCSD Cancer Center; and William B. Grant, Ph.D., of the Sunlight, Nutrition and Health Research Center, San Francisco
Similar Posts:
- None Found
|
|
|
|
|
 |
