New evidence on a key nutrient offers hope to cancer patients; will the FDA snuff it out? A new study on annatto-sourced delta-tocotrienol (one of the compounds contained in vitamin E) has shown incredible results for extending the life of ovarian cancer patients. It is a stunning finding that should be hailed as a major breakthrough, but don’t expect to hear much about it from the crony medical establishment, which does everything it can to prevent you from learning about the benefits of natural products. It’s hard to over emphasize how ground-breaking this study is. There have been studies on the anti-cancer effect of certain nutrients, but these are generally smaller in scale and use animal or in vitro models; never before has the ability of a nutrient to significantly prolong survival in cancer patients been demonstrated in a study of drug-level quality. Further, the authors of the study don’t explicitly say it, but implicit in the study’s results is that Avastin might not be required. Overall survival in patients on just Avastin was 5-7 months; for Avastin plus delta-tocotrienol, it was 11 months. This could mean that delta-tocotrienol is just as effective, if not more so, than Avastin—but more study would be required to establish this. These are astonishing results and great news for women with ovarian cancer. Because natural medicines generally cannot be patented—meaning the drug industry can’t make mega-profits from them—the government suppresses what the public can know about their benefits, lest drug companies lose some market share. The feds don’t tell us, for example, about the promising cancer research on vitamin C. In fact, the agency will try to block you from knowing about the benefits of these nutrients because they aren’t FDA-approved drugs, and only drugs can make claims to treat or prevent a disease. The FDA wouldn’t want to upset the cancer drug industry’s more than $100 billion market.
A recently published study (October 2017) challenges the accepted mainstream medical theory that ovarian cancer is developed in the ovaries. The study, "Molecular analysis of high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma with and without associated serous tubal intra-epithelial carcinoma," was conducted by medical researchers in 2016 at both the Sloan-Kettering Cancer Institute and Johns Hopkins. The study contends that, "For decades it was thought that ovarian carcinoma originates in the OSE or ovarian CICs, but few data supported this claim. Lesions resembling an intraepithelial carcinoma in CICs and the OSE are rare. In contrast, a putative precursor of ovarian carcinoma has been described in the fallopian tube, designated STIC, which is found frequently in association with “ovarian” HGSCs and in the fallopian tubes removed prophylactically from high-risk women. The implications of these findings are to direct efforts for prevention and early detection toward the distal fallopian tube, rather than the OSE. Ongoing and planned clinical trials are investigating bilateral salpingectomy with ovarian preservation as a viable option for ovarian cancer risk-reduction." Women are often encouraged to have their ovaries removed during an existing pelvic operation to ensure protection against ovarian cancer. Dr. Robert J. Rowen, M.D. is questioning the need for such surgeries in light of this new study. The result of surgically removing ovaries, for millions of women, according to Dr. Rowen, has been: “… a nightmare of hormonal difficulties. The ovaries do, in fact, make some hormone even after menopause and all the eggs are gone.”
A St. Louis jury on Thursday awarded a California woman more than $70 million in her lawsuit alleging that years of using Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder caused her cancer, the latest case raising concerns about the health ramifications of extended talcum powder use. The jury ruling ended the trial that began Sept. 26 in the case brought by Deborah Giannecchini of Modesto. She was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2012. The suit accused Johnson & Johnson of “negligent conduct” in making and marketing its baby powder.
Johnson & Johnson (J&J) is a well-known and trusted "baby friendly" brand, producing a range of baby products and feminine hygiene items. Unfortunately, J&J has failed the public trust yet again. And the lack of regulations relating to cosmetics is what helped them bury the dangers of one of its flagship products. In 2008, I warned women to cease using talcum powder. I noted there were several studies showing that applying talcum powder to the genital area might raise a woman's risk of ovarian cancer if the powder particles were to travel up through her vagina and get lodged in her ovaries. In February, 2016, a jury found J&J's talcum powder had contributed to 62-year old Jacqueline Fox's ovarian cancer, awarding Fox $72 million in damages. Ten million dollars was awarded for compensatory damages. Another $62 million in punitive damages was awarded to her family members, as Fox died last fall, succumbing to the disease after being diagnosed with ovarian cancer three years ago.