Breast Cancer – the Secret Cause of Breast Cancer (Every Woman Must Read This)
Dr Vernon Coleman MB ChB DSc FRSA
There is now clear medical and scientific evidence available to show that nothing, not even tobacco, influences your chances of developing cancer as much as the food you choose to eat. It is estimated that between 30% and 60% of all cancers are caused by what you choose to eat.
Doctors, scientists and supporters of the cancer industry claim that the battle against cancer will only be won with the aid of more money. They claim that in order to obtain the information we need we must spend, spend, spend. But that isn’t true. It is not more knowledge we need but the ability and courage and determination to use the knowledge we already have.
Back in 1982, the National Research Council in the United States of America published a technical report entitled Diet, Nutrition and Cancer which showed that diet was probably the single most important factor in the development of cancer, and that there was evidence linking cancers of the breast, colon and prostate to particular foods or types of food.
It is a scandal of astonishing proportions that a majority of the population still do not know about these vitally important and well-established links. It is an even bigger scandal that a majority of the medical profession are unaware of these links too. Most doctors I have spoken to — even recently qualified ones — still dismiss the idea of a food/cancer link as mumbo-jumbo nonsense, preferring to rely entirely on prescription drugs, radiotherapy and surgery as ‘treatments’ for cancer. The average medical student probably spends more time staring down a microscope at histology slides than he or she spends studying the importance and significance of nutrition.
Between a third and a half of all cancers are caused by eating the wrong types of food. You can dramatically reduce your chances of developing cancer of the breast, cancer of the prostate, cancer of the colon, cancer of the ovary or cancer of the uterus.
I have been studying scientific research papers for over two decades and I have never seen such convincing research as that which shows the links between particular types of food and particular types of cancer.
I have absolutely no doubt that if these undeniable links had been publicised by the responsible authorities (in medicine as elsewhere the phrase ‘responsible authorities’ is, I fear, oxymoronic) countless millions of lives and an enormous amount of agony and distress could — and would — have been avoided.
The suppression of this information by a greedy and conscience-free food industry, compliant revenue conscious politicians, a cancer industry dominated by grant hungry researchers and an uncaring, drug company dominated medical profession has, I sincerely believe, led to more deaths than any war in history.
Since the early 1980s, the amount of evidence linking diet to cancer has grown steadily. In 1990, even the British Medical Association, hardly an organisation which would be widely described as revolutionary, supported the view that there is a link between food and cancer. Their published view was that 35% of cancers, just over a third, were caused by the natural constituents of food and that another 1% of cancers were caused by food additives.
Other organisations suggest that the link between food and cancer is even higher. The National Academy of Sciences in the United States, founded in 1863 by Act of Congress to serve as an official adviser to the US government in all matters of science and technology, has reported that researchers have estimated that almost 60% of women’s cancers and a little more than 40% of men’s cancers are related to nutritional factors.
Because I recognise that many readers may be sceptical about the claim that there is a strong link between diet and food (such scepticism will undoubtedly be enhanced by the fact that neither governments nor the medical profession have made much, if any, effort to publicise these links) I have summarised just some of the scientific evidence which supports this claim.
My previous efforts to publicise the health values of eating a low fat, meatless diet have been consistently confronted by scepticism and opposition. It is my hope that this summary of just some of the most important available evidence supporting the contention that certain foods are a risk factor in the development of cancer will help settle this particular contro¬versy permanently and may, perhaps, help other writers who may be tempted to tell their readers the truth about food and cancer.
I must emphasise that this list is not intended to be comprehensive. I have accumulated a list of several hundred scientific papers and journal articles dealing with the links between food and cancer (and many thousands more dealing with food and other disorders) and this list is merely intended to be representative — and to provide you with some idea of the breadth and importance of the available evidence.
The cancers most closely associated with nutritional factors are breast and endometrial cancer in women, prostate cancer in men and gastrointestinal cancer.
Here is just some of the scientific evidence proving that meat causes breast cancer.
The message to women is a simple one.
Calorie-Providing Nutrients and Risk of Breast Cancer
Paolo Toniolo (Epidemiology Unit, Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, Milan, Italy and Department of Environmental Medicine, New York University Medical Center, New York, USA), Elio Riboli (Unit of Analytical Epidemiology, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France), Fulvia Protta (Pathology Service, Ospedale Maggiore S. Giovanni, Turin, Italy), Martine Charrel (Unit of Analytical Epidemiology, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France), Alberto M Cappa (Pathology Service, Ospedale Maggiore S. Giovanni, Turin, Italy)
Journal of the National Cancer Institute
February 15th 1989
This study, which was conducted in the province of Vercelli in northwestern Italy where there is a moderately high incidence of breast cancer, was designed to investigate the role of diet in breast cancer and ‘to test the primary hypothesis that fat and proteins from animal sources are associated with increased risk of breast cancer.’
The researchers questioned 250 women with breast cancer and a random sample of 499 women from the general population, using a structured questionnaire to identify the types and quantities of food each woman consumed.
After reporting that they had ‘found evidence that the intake of total fat, saturated fat or proteins of animal origin is positively associated with the risk of breast cancer in women’ the researchers reported that their ‘findings had suggested that during adult life a reduction in total fat to less than 30% of calorie intake, of saturated fat to less than 10% of calorie intake and of animal proteins to less than 6% may lead to a substantial reduction in the incidence of breast cancer in population subgroups with high intake of saturated fat and animal proteins in agreement with some dietary recommendations that have been made.’
‘These data,’ said the researchers, ‘suggest that during adult life a reduction in dietary intake of fat and proteins of animal origin may contribute to a substantial reduction in the incidence of breast cancer in population subgroups with high intake of animal products.’
Dietary Habits and Prognostic Factors in Breast Cancer
Lars-Erik Holm (Department of Cancer Prevention, Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden), Eva Callmer (Department of Medical Nutrition, Huddinge Hospital, Huddinge, Sweden), Marie-Louise Hjalmar (Department of General Oncology, Danderyd Hospital, Danderyd, Sweden), Elizabet Lidbrink (Department of General Oncology, South Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden), Bo Nilsson (Department of Cancer Epidemiology, Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden, Lambert Skoog (De¬partment of Clinical Cytology, Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden).
Journal of the National Cancer Institute
August 16th 1989
The link between dietary fat and breast tumours was first described in 1942. Since then many other scientists have published papers detailing this link in further detail. ‘Dietary fat has been suggested as an etiological factor in human breast cancer because of the high correlation between national per capita fat consumption and breast cancer incidence,’ begin the authors of this paper whose study included 240 women who had surgery for breast cancer between the years of 1983 and 1986 in Stockholm, Sweden. All the women involved in this study were aged between 50 and 65 at the time that their cancers were diagnosed. After analysing their results the authors of this paper concluded: ‘The results of this study of mainly postmenopausal women and some premenopausal women suggest that dietary habits have an impact on the prognosis of breast cancer.’
‘Study results indicate that dietary factors may act in breast carcinogenesis,’ continued the authors in their discussion of their results. ‘Several studies have found that these factors also operate after diagnosis of the tumour, suggesting that dietary habits are important even after a successful primary treatment. The results of this study suggest that dietary patterns of the Western world (e.g. high fat intake and low consumption of carbohydrates and fiber) affect certain prognostic factors in breast cancer, such as tumour size and oestrogen receptor content of the tumour.’
Dietary Fat Consumption and Survival Among Women With Breast Cancer
David I. Gregorio, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, State University of New York, Buffalo, New York, United States of America; Lawrence J. Emrich, Department of Biomathematics, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, New York, United States of America; Saxon Graham, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, State University of New York, Buffalo, New York, United States of America; James R. Marshall, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, State University of New York, Buffalo, New York, United States of America, and Takuma Nemoto, Department of Breast Surgery, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, Buffalo, New York, United States of America
Journal of the National Cancer Institute
The researchers estimated monthly fat consumption for a total of 854 patients who completed dietary intake interviews when they were admitted to hospital and subsequently estimated that 24% of the women consumed between 500 and 1,000 grams of fat a month, 42% consumed between 1,001 and 1,500 grams of fat a month, 21% consumed between 1,501 and 2,000 grams of fat a month and 11% consumed between 2,001 and 3,000 grams of fat.
They reported their findings as follows: ‘Consistent with our hypothesis, an effect of fat intake on survival time was reported in this study’ and concluded that the ‘estimated risk of death at any time increased 1.4 fold for every 1,000 gram in monthly fat intake’.
Dietary Factors and Breast Cancer Risk
Jay H. Lubin, Environmental Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, U.S.A.; Patricia E. Burns, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; William J. Blot, Environmental Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, U.S.A.; Regina G. Ziegler, Environmental Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, U.S.A.; Alan W. Lees, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada and Joseph F. Fraumeni, Jr., Environmental Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, U.S.A.
International Journal of Cancer
These researchers questioned 577 women aged between 30 and 80 (all of whom had breast cancer) and 826 disease free women about their eating habits. They found that women who ate beef, pork and sweet desserts were significantly more likely to develop breast cancer than women who did not. They also found that women who fried with butter or margarine, as opposed to vegetable oils, and who used butter at the table were also more likely to develop breast cancer.
The evidence here is taken from Food for Thought by Vernon Coleman, available as an ebook on Amazon and first published in 1994.
For the record, when Food for Thought was first published the Advertising Standards Authority banned advertisements for it and the Press Complaints Commission condemned an article based on it. Both were responding to complaints from the meat industry. Neither organisation would look at the research papers before reaching their conclusions (though these were offered to them). Neither organisation has yet apologised for attempting to suppress vital information which could have saved thousands of lives.
Copyright Vernon Coleman 2017
There are hundreds of free articles on www.vernoncoleman.com and www.vernoncoleman.co.uk
For a biography please see www.vernoncoleman.org or www.vernoncoleman.net
And there are over 60 books by Vernon Coleman available as ebooks on Amazon.
I’m afraid, however, that you have to pay for those. (But not a lot.)