Re: Biopsies triggering cancer?

[Guest guest]

I would think that a biopsy would not 'turn' anything cancerous but could,

'seed' (spread) cancer cells that already exist.

When I brought this to the attention of my Urologist who wanted to biopsy my

prostate he agreed but countered that he uses a " lot of water to minimize this

happening " . ??

Joe C.

[Guest guest]

I have seen lesions that have been quiescent for years become

aggressively malignant and apparently metastatic after a biopsy. In

the conventional world most cancer therapies are predicated on biopsy

results. If a lesion is cancerous and is in an early stage there is

usually not too much harm if follow-up action is immediate. If one

chooses this course of action then make sure that the pathologist

does a complete work-up. It is not enough that only a frozen section

is performed with no more information other than that it is likely

cancer. Should the cancer return you want to know exactly what you

are dealing with without molesting it again.

If a person knows from the beginning that if a lesion is likely

cancer and they have no intention of treating it conventionally, then

a biopsy might not be the smartest idea. There are usually other

ways to determine if a lesion is cancerous, and if so, the type of cancer.

Last week I spoke to a woman who had tumors growing throughout her

spine and had been confined to a wheelchair. She refused a biopsy

and started on a raw foods and raw meat diet. This reduced the sized

of her lesions. Her health has improved such that she no longer

needs a wheelchair. Neither she nor her physicians have any proof

that she has cancer.

Oxygen exposure will not turn a specimen cancerous.

At 02:27 AM 12/11/2006, you wrote:

>Can anyone tell me if a biopsy on a precancerous lump can turn it

>cancerous? Also can the specimin go cancerous after it's removed due

>to contact with oxygen?

>

>Thanks

>Darryl

[Guest guest]

I'm primarily answering a private response from Bruce here but putting some

other things out to the list so please excuse me if it seems a little

incongruent to this thread. , I've read your post but can't answer as to

why they can't tell more from the biopsy.

My wife became aware of this lump in her breast about a year ago. She assumed

it was a blocked duct from her milk production not stopping for 8 months after

weening our second child. She had it ultrasounded in August which showed

nothing to worry about, but a junor doctor ordered a biospy anyway. This came

back inconclusive so a second was ordered which came back showing grade 2

invasive ductal carcanomer. That was my main question about what the initial

biopsy could have done. One natropath diagnosed it as precancerous, but on a

more recent vist has shown it to have become cancerous. Another earlier one

considered the lump mostly resulting from a clogged lymphatic system. My wife's

on quite a number natropathic remidies and suppliments. It's been about 5 weeks

since the diagnosis.

Another doctor's appointment thismorning told her that they are planning the

masectomy and chemo while bub is still inutro when they've previously told us

that the chemo wouldn't start until after birth. It's insane.

The potential disfiguration doesn't offend me. I've previously worked in a

couple of schools and care agencies for severly and multiply impared children

and well know the difference between a whole person and a whole body. However I

have deep beliefs concerning the nature of the soul/body connection and in the

context of quite a number of powerful spiritual events leading up to this, I

don't believe such surgery will be neccissary. I also have great concern for

our unborn and would rather them be totally untouched by any allopathic effects

for the main fact that such effects would be highly unpredictible both in the

short and long term. I also see it as greatly important for mother and child to

have a complete oppertunity to bond and nurture.

My wife's reluctant to start immuno enhansing treatments for fear of it impact

upon the baby given that the immunsystem is thought to be supressed while

pregnant so the body doesn't reject the feotus as alien tissue. Comments

welcome.

My next question relates to the 'Parazapper'. I'd bought " The Cure for All

Cancers " some years ago when an aging friend had cancer and so had built one of

these devices. In mine and my wife's experience, the zapper has had obvious

effect on intestinal worms at least as many could be seen in stool after

treatment. But I've not found a great deal of information regarding the theory

of operation. I understand that more effective zappers run dual frequencies of

2.5kHz and 30KHz with many harmonics produced aswell. I'm in the process of

building such a dual channel zapper but for curiosity sake would like to know

more about them.

Curiosity aside, there is always warnings against using zappers while pregnant.

These warnings are usually on the authority that they simply havn't been tested

as such. Does anyone know of anyone else who has used the device while

pregnant?

Thanks again,

Darryl

[Guest guest]

VGammill wrote:

> If a person knows from the beginning that if a lesion is likely

> cancer and they have no intention of treating it conventionally,

then a biopsy might not be the smartest idea. There are usually other

> ways to determine if a lesion is cancerous, and if so, the type of

cancer.

>

, What are the other ways (other than biopsy) to determine if

a lesion is cancerous and the type of cancer?

Thanks, Marie

[Guest guest]

Vince will probably have other answers for you. In my case I had an MRSI for

prostate cancer instead of a biopsy.

This is the one of latest technology advances. It comprises an MRI and

magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging) (MRSI) From these images the doctor is

able to determine the presence of cancer in the target area and in all

surrounding tissue. It is 98% accurate versus about 60% for biopsies. It is non

invasive. Not expensive, (about $2,400) when you wheigh that cost against the

cost of a biopsy, lab work, and subsquent interpretation.

It is currently available in 17 hospitals and clinics in the USA if that is

where you live. A quick search of GE's web site will tell you which other

countries it is available in. This will eventually replace biopsies as the main

diagnostic tool for cancer. As with all new advances the technology is expensive

to add on to an MRI machine, and technicians and doctors have to be trained

locally, before it becomes universally available.

Dan

yoginilm wrote:

, What are the other ways (other than biopsy) to determine if

a lesion is cancerous and the type of cancer?

Thanks, Marie