Guest guest Posted February 2, 2001 Report Share Posted February 2, 2001 I think that what often happens in cancer of all kinds is that heat toxins damage the zheng qi and yin without resolving. When the zheng qi is depleted it cannot fight the heat toxins so there are symptoms of vacuity, but also there are still underlying replete pathogens. Using kidney tonics helps patients feel better but doesn't really get to the root problem. I think it better to use large (about 30 gram) doses of herbs like bai hua she she cao, zi hua di ding, and in breast cancer pu gong ying to clear heat and resolve toxins. These herbs are not traditionally considered to strengthen zheng qi, but from a bio-medical point of view they are immuno-stimulating. Both bai hua she she cao, zi hua di ding are really good at clearing heat and resolving toxins. Pu gong ying not only resolves toxins but also scatters qi accumulations. It is particularly good when heat toxins cause qi swelling of the breasts (and/or lymph nodes), plus which it also clears phlegm heat from the upper burner, disinhibits dampness and promotes its downward circulation (it has diuretic properties). By the way I am one of those on the list who is the currently living in (Sydney) Australia. Why do you ask? Garry Seifert. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 In a message dated 2/25/08 3:12:15 PM US Mountain Standard Time, agapetouchmassage writes: I suggest reading the book by Susan Weed - Breast Cancer Breast Health ************** Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/\ 2050827 ?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 --- AlladinG wrote: > I suggest reading the book by Susan Weed - Breast > Cancer Breast Health I second that. And suggest additionally: Cancer Salves (www.cancersalves.com) by Ingrid Naiman. Cancer Salves (the book) is about the escharotic salves used in cancer situations. But that's not all that's in the book. There's a lot of after-the-salves treatment information, which I would think would be applicable to after-a-mastectomy (or lumpectomy) situation. The herbal Materia Medica alone is worth the cost of the book, in my opinion. Just off hand, I do not remember anything about EOs in the book, but it's been a while since I read it. Ingrid is very available for email contact through any and all of her sites (she's got about 20 on different subjects including www.ingridnaiman.com). I am sure she could answer your question about her own knowledge of EOs used in cancer situations. She might also suggest information for you that might be specifically tailored to a blind researcher or practitioner. Just as an aside, more years ago than I like to think about, back when I was in massage school, we were taught not to use massage as a therapeutic intervention in cancer situations for fear of spreading any metastatic cells. Which seems a huge shame given how wonderful massage is for all stress related problems including fear and depression. From my later training in acupuncture and oriental medicine, I must agree with that contraindication. However, I still might choose to use massage anyway, or at least qi gong or reiki type stuff, but I would want to be sure that the docs felt there was no chance of the cancer already having spread before actually laying hands on in massage. KD ______________________________\ ____ Never miss a thing. Make your home page. http://www./r/hs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Hi Laura Ann, I can't help with that info but I'm sure those who do will chime in. I just wanted to say hang in there, God is holding your hand through this. I will keep your mum in my prayers. Michelle Yap Ital Blends, Jamaica , " Laura Ann Grymes, LMT " <agapetouchmassage wrote: > > hello, > My name is Laura Ann and I live in Texas with my mom. > > She was diagnosed with Ductal Carcinoma Breast Cancer with some signs > of possible invasive cells. > >(...snipped) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2008 Report Share Posted February 26, 2008 Can someone elaborate more on avoiding estrogen/hormone type essential oils if one has an estrogen type cancer or may be at risk for developing this type of cancer? Good luck in your mom's treatment Susan , " Laura Ann Grymes, LMT " <agapetouchmassage wrote: > > > > We found many of the care products she was on with essential oils in > them had estrogen hormone type essential oils in them such as lemon > grass, melissa and so on. > > we are avoiding anything with lemon grss, melissa, geranium, clarie > sage and so on. > > Thank you > Laura Ann > > Laura Ann Grymes, LMT Licensed Massage Therapist > Wellness massage with an agape touch! > 979-204-9393 agape.wellness.massage > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Thank you so much for the book recommendations....I will get them. I so appreciate each of you. Laura Ann Laura Ann Grymes, LMT Licensed Massage Therapist Wellness massage with an agape touch! 979-204-9393 agape.wellness.massage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 --- susan <ripple95 wrote: > Can someone elaborate more on avoiding > estrogen/hormone type essential > oils if one has an estrogen type cancer or may be at > risk for > developing this type of cancer? Susan, I am not sure of your question? Generally, in a case of a possibly hormonally generated or related cancers such as breast, or ovarian, etc., one should avoid estrogenic (estrogen producing) substances, no matter what they are: EOs, herbs singles or formulas, foods (soy is the biggie here), environmental toxins such as plastics & pesticides which are pseudo-estrogens (fakes that act like real), some drugs, acupuncture treatments aimed at what Western Medicine would view as hormones (such as treatments to increase fertility) .... Does that answer? If not please ask some more specific questions. KD ______________________________\ ____ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Search. http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Hi, I do understand your reply in that many substances can mimic estrogen in the body and aggravate certain cancers. But, regarding Laura's post as follows in part: " We found many of the care products she was on with essential oils in them had estrogen hormone type essential oils in them such as lemon grass, melissa and so on. we are avoiding anything with lemon grss, melissa, geranium, clary sage and so on. " I was wondering if these oils are being avoided by Laura's mom as a chosen precaution or because medically it is known that they are dangerous to someone with cancer or at risk for certain cancers. I was trying to find info on cancer and essential oils but only came up with info on studies using eo's & aromatherapy to help people get through cancer treatment and its side effect-no info on oils to avoid with certain types of cancers. Not long ago there was the controversy over tea tree and lavender causing hormonal changes in boys so it would seem some people might choose to avoid those oils as well if they think the study was true and those oils can affect hormone levels. Thanks, Susan , KD <kunzang.dechen wrote: > > > --- susan <ripple95 wrote: > > > Can someone elaborate more on avoiding > > estrogen/hormone type essential > > oils if one has an estrogen type cancer or may be at > > risk for > > developing this type of cancer? > > Susan, I am not sure of your question? Generally, in > a case of a possibly hormonally generated or related > cancers such as breast, or ovarian, etc., one should > avoid estrogenic (estrogen producing) substances, no > matter what they are: EOs, herbs singles or formulas, > foods (soy is the biggie here), environmental toxins > such as plastics & pesticides which are > pseudo-estrogens (fakes that act like real), some > drugs, acupuncture treatments aimed at what Western > Medicine would view as hormones (such as treatments to > increase fertility) .... > > Does that answer? If not please ask some more > specific questions. > > KD > > > ______________________________\ ____ > Looking for last minute shopping deals? > Find them fast with Search. http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 below --- susan <ripple95 wrote: > Hi, I do understand your reply in that many > substances can mimic > estrogen in the body and aggravate certain cancers. > But, regarding > Laura's post as follows in part: Some substances mimic estrogens (pseudo-estrogens in toxins) but some ARE estrogens just PLANT or other animal estrogens. Might seem unnecessary to make the distinction, but from an alt med paradigm perspective I think it's important, because pseudo-estrogens are by far the most dangerous IMHO because they do not participate in the hormonal CYCLE of the coming and going of estrogen, but rather lock in and homestead receptor sites that would usually be used for the body's own estrogen. Therefore they are much more implicated in all hormonal problems from infertility thru estrogenic or related cancer because the body cannot tell the difference from the stimulation of the receptor sites by PSEUDO-estrogen or its own real estrogen which periodically lets go of the receptor sites, but the pseudo-estrogen never does, so the " I got estrogen here " signal never goes away. > I was wondering if these oils are being avoided by > Laura's mom as a > chosen precaution or because medically it is known > that they are > dangerous to someone with cancer or at risk for > certain cancers. I assume by this you mean that you would like to know if there are gold-standard, double-blind, placebo controlled studies done in the Standard Western Orthodox Medical/Scientific paradigm that have found that those or other oils have promoted or been identified as a causative factors in cancer, right? If so, I am unfortunately unqualified to answer this question, but I bet Martin, Butch or one of the other wonderful scientifically-qualified folks with an interest in that arena CAN (that's why this list community is so important! BTW Ingrid Naiman of CancerSalves.com, probably could tell you if she has ever seen or heard of any. She did A LOT of research for her book. > I was > trying to find info on cancer and essential oils but > only came up with > info on studies using eo's & aromatherapy to help > people get through > cancer treatment and its side effect-no info on oils > to avoid with > certain types of cancers. Yeah. W Med is not much interested in us fringe protocol folks, other than to try to dissuade patients from seeking us out. > Not long ago there was the > controversy over > tea tree and lavender causing hormonal changes in > boys so it would > seem some people might choose to avoid those oils as > well if they > think the study was true and those oils can affect > hormone levels. People might choose to avoid those oils because they heard what you did and not the rest of the story, which I seem to remember proved to be crap but the particular brand of crap I don't remember. If that's true, then, the media lackeys of BigPharma did their duty <sigh!>. From all I know of herbs and foods (and the little I know of EOs) I believe that people mostly avoid estrogenic herbs in an abundance of caution rather than based on " scientific research " . I would myself, even tho I take a very jaundiced view of " science " as it is usually practiced. The true scientific paradigm has much to recommend it, unfortunately those who practice it do not practice it authentically, but rather use it as a tool to validate their pet theories and benefit their pocketbooks. IMHO jaundiced it admittedly is. KD > Thanks, Susan > > > , KD > <kunzang.dechen wrote: > > > > > > --- susan <ripple95 wrote: > > > > > Can someone elaborate more on avoiding > > > estrogen/hormone type essential > > > oils if one has an estrogen type cancer or may > ______________________________\ ____ Never miss a thing. Make your home page. http://www./r/hs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Thanks for your time on this. I did look up info on phytoestrogens and cancer and saw a bit of information on herbs to avoid along with lots of information regarding the controversy of soy products-nothing on EO's though. And yes you're right. I was wondering if there were any official studies on the eo's being avoided. Susan , KD <kunzang.dechen wrote: > > below > --- susan <ripple95 wrote: > > > Hi, I do understand your reply in that many > > substances can mimic > > estrogen in the body and aggravate certain cancers. > > But, regarding > > Laura's post as follows in part: > > Some substances mimic estrogens (pseudo-estrogens in > toxins) but some ARE estrogens just PLANT or other > animal estrogens. Might seem unnecessary to make the > distinction, but from an alt med paradigm perspective > I think it's important, because pseudo-estrogens are > by far the most dangerous IMHO because they do not > participate in the hormonal CYCLE of the coming and > going of estrogen, but rather lock in and homestead > receptor sites that would usually be used for the > body's own estrogen. Therefore they are much more > implicated in all hormonal problems from infertility > thru estrogenic or related cancer because the body > cannot tell the difference from the stimulation of the > receptor sites by PSEUDO-estrogen or its own real > estrogen which periodically lets go of the receptor > sites, but the pseudo-estrogen never does, so the " I > got estrogen here " signal never goes away. > > > I was wondering if these oils are being avoided by > > Laura's mom as a > > chosen precaution or because medically it is known > > that they are > > dangerous to someone with cancer or at risk for > > certain cancers. > > I assume by this you mean that you would like to know > if there are gold-standard, double-blind, placebo > controlled studies done in the Standard Western > Orthodox Medical/Scientific paradigm that have found > that those or other oils have promoted or been > identified as a causative factors in cancer, right? > > If so, I am unfortunately unqualified to answer this > question, but I bet Martin, Butch or one of the other > wonderful scientifically-qualified folks with an > interest in that arena CAN (that's why this list > community is so important! BTW Ingrid Naiman of > CancerSalves.com, probably could tell you if she has > ever seen or heard of any. She did A LOT of research > for her book. > > > I was > > trying to find info on cancer and essential oils but > > only came up with > > info on studies using eo's & aromatherapy to help > > people get through > > cancer treatment and its side effect-no info on oils > > to avoid with > > certain types of cancers. > > Yeah. W Med is not much interested in us fringe > protocol folks, other than to try to dissuade patients > from seeking us out. > > > Not long ago there was the > > controversy over > > tea tree and lavender causing hormonal changes in > > boys so it would > > seem some people might choose to avoid those oils as > > well if they > > think the study was true and those oils can affect > > hormone levels. > > People might choose to avoid those oils because they > heard what you did and not the rest of the story, > which I seem to remember proved to be crap but the > particular brand of crap I don't remember. If that's > true, then, the media lackeys of BigPharma did their > duty <sigh!>. > > From all I know of herbs and foods (and the little I > know of EOs) I believe that people mostly avoid > estrogenic herbs in an abundance of caution rather > than based on " scientific research " . I would myself, > even tho I take a very jaundiced view of " science " as > it is usually practiced. The true scientific paradigm > has much to recommend it, unfortunately those who > practice it do not practice it authentically, but > rather use it as a tool to validate their pet theories > and benefit their pocketbooks. IMHO jaundiced it > admittedly is. > > KD > > > Thanks, Susan > > > > > > , KD > > <kunzang.dechen@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- susan <ripple95@> wrote: > > > > > > > Can someone elaborate more on avoiding > > > > estrogen/hormone type essential > > > > oils if one has an estrogen type cancer or may > > > > > > ______________________________\ ____ > Never miss a thing. Make your home page. > http://www./r/hs > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 Hi susan, We are choosing to avoid them as a precaution not out of scientific research studies I have found. I did find these listed as hormone stimulating type oils and am just being caucious. We go to an oncologist tomorrow. Thanks guys for your help. Laura Ann Laura Ann Grymes, LMT Licensed Massage Therapist Wellness massage with an agape touch! 979-204-9393 agape.wellness.massage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 I have a tendency to read the medical literature in this area and I don't believe that much of this is even known. Although many plants (and eos) contain estrogen like compounds that is too much of a generalization to go by. Some estrogen like compounds will bind to the estrogen receptor and promote growth - similar to how estrogen works, while others will bind to the estrogen receptor and prevent estrogen from binding thus acting as antiestrogen. This is the basis for some cancer treatments such as tamoxifen - this is an estrogen like compound that binds to the receptor and thus prevents estrogen from promoting growth. Estrogen is a strong promoter of growth which is a main function of the hormone during puberty - to promote growth and development of the reproductive tract. As was mentioned, the published report a few months back showed that lavender and tea tree essential oils also promoted growth of breast cancer cells in vitro which by itself does not really mean much. Constituents of lavender eo (limonene) are currently undergoing studies as a treatment for breast cancer too. Lavender has been used by many cancer patients both to reduce radiation burns and to promote quality of life. It would be nice if we could categorize eos as to wether or not they contain estrogenic activity or not but as I said, I just don't think all of that work has been done before. And then once it is done it will have to be determined exactly what that estrogenic acitivity is and whether it is growth promoting or growth inhibiting. Cindy Jones Sagescript Institute, llc http://www.sagescript.com; http://sagescript.blogspot.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2008 Report Share Posted February 27, 2008 , KD <kunzang.dechen wrote: > > --- AlladinG wrote: > > >> Just as an aside, more years ago than I like to think > about, back when I was in massage school, we were > taught not to use massage as a therapeutic > intervention in cancer situations for fear of > spreading any metastatic cells. Which seems a huge > shame given how wonderful massage is for all stress > related problems including fear and depression. From > my later training in acupuncture and oriental > medicine, I must agree with that contraindication. > However, I still might choose to use massage anyway, > or at least qi gong or reiki type stuff, but I would > want to be sure that the docs felt there was no chance > of the cancer already having spread before actually > laying hands on in massage. > > KD > > I am a massage therapist trained in massage for cancer and this is a huge misnomer. Massage will not cause metastizing of cancer. There is a whole thing on it needing to set up it's own blood supply and the cancer cells are moving thru the body all the time and that massage can in no way cause it to metastize in and of itself. However, when it comes to massage and especially with breast cancer you must be very careful becuz they always take the lymphnodes out and the massage therapist can cause lymphedema. thought I would put in my two cents in. I was taught this in school and so were most massage students, but there have been several studies that disprove that claim and you absolutely right because when it comes to cancer massage can be so beneficial in terms of pain, anxiety and depression. valorie > ____________________ ______________ > Never miss a thing. Make your home page. > http://www./r/hs > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2008 Report Share Posted February 28, 2008 I understand your desire to be cautious. As with everything else one study will tell you one thing and another study will tell you something else. Sometimes you have to just use your best judgement. Good luck with everything. Susan , " Laura Ann Grymes, LMT " <agapetouchmassage wrote: > > Hi susan, > We are choosing to avoid them as a precaution not out of scientific > research studies I have found. > > I did find these listed as hormone stimulating type oils and am just > being caucious. > > We go to an oncologist tomorrow. > > Thanks guys for your help. > Laura Ann > Laura Ann Grymes, LMT Licensed Massage Therapist > Wellness massage with an agape touch! > 979-204-9393 agape.wellness.massage > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2008 Report Share Posted February 28, 2008 Just before reading your post I came across an article on this very topic. Phytoestrogens v. synthetic estrogens and whether they play different roles in the development or protection of the body from certain cancers. The article leaned toward the belief that phytoestrogens will block, not contribute to estrogen-linked cancers. I would like to believe this as well but without some well done long term studies who can tell? So I suppose it's like everything else-do the research and make your best judgement based on the situation. Susan , " Cindy Jones " <cindyjones1 wrote: > > I have a tendency to read the medical literature in this area and I > don't believe that much of this is even known. Although many plants > (and eos) contain estrogen like compounds that is too much of a > generalization to go by. Some estrogen like compounds will bind to > the estrogen receptor and promote growth - similar to how estrogen > works, while others will bind to the estrogen receptor and prevent > estrogen from binding thus acting as antiestrogen. This is the basis > for some cancer treatments such as tamoxifen - this is an estrogen > like compound that binds to the receptor and thus prevents estrogen > from promoting growth. Estrogen is a strong promoter of growth which > is a main function of the hormone during puberty - to promote growth > and development of the reproductive tract. > > As was mentioned, the published report a few months back showed that > lavender and tea tree essential oils also promoted growth of breast > cancer cells in vitro which by itself does not really mean much. > Constituents of lavender eo (limonene) are currently undergoing > studies as a treatment for breast cancer too. Lavender has been used > by many cancer patients both to reduce radiation burns and to > promote quality of life. It would be nice if we could categorize eos > as to wether or not they contain estrogenic activity or not but as I > said, I just don't think all of that work has been done before. And > then once it is done it will have to be determined exactly what that > estrogenic acitivity is and whether it is growth promoting or growth > inhibiting. > > Cindy Jones > Sagescript Institute, llc > http://www.sagescript.com; http://sagescript.blogspot.com > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2008 Report Share Posted February 28, 2008 Hi Susan, We on Aromaconnection have reported extensively debunking the occurrence of Gynecomastia using lavender/tea tree in pre-pubescent boys last year. It is the opinion of many of us that the research was flawed . . . Check out: http://www.aromaconnection.org/lavendertea_treegynecomastia/index.html Many of us believe that the popularity of both essential oils prompted this bad research and a response in the medical community to discourage use of both (which of course they can't patent and control) . . . Resulting in an unprecedented media blast of the NEJM paper across the country, picked up by the blogosphere. Be well, Marcia Elston Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence, est. 1988 http://www.wingedseed.com Online 3/95 http://www.aromaconnection.org Group Blog 2/07 " Historically, the most terrible things - war, genocide and slavery - have resulted from obedience, not disobedience. " Howard Zinn > > > On Behalf Of susan > Tuesday, February 26, 2008 9:52 PM > > Re: breast cancer > > Hi, I do understand your reply in that many substances can > mimic estrogen in the body and aggravate certain cancers. > But, regarding Laura's post as follows in part: > > " We found many of the care products she was on with essential > oils in them had estrogen hormone type essential oils in them > such as lemon grass, melissa and so on. > > we are avoiding anything with lemon grss, melissa, geranium, > clary sage and so on. " > > I was wondering if these oils are being avoided by Laura's > mom as a chosen precaution or because medically it is known > that they are dangerous to someone with cancer or at risk for > certain cancers. I was trying to find info on cancer and > essential oils but only came up with info on studies using > eo's & aromatherapy to help people get through cancer > treatment and its side effect-no info on oils to avoid with > certain types of cancers. Not long ago there was the > controversy over tea tree and lavender causing hormonal > changes in boys so it would seem some people might choose to > avoid those oils as well if they think the study was true and > those oils can affect hormone levels. > Thanks, Susan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2008 Report Share Posted February 28, 2008 I would agree to do more research, but I also think the study you refer to below could be on to something. Most of us here know (and have friends who have suffered the consequences) of Premarin (a synthetic hormone replacement) induced cancer. The lawsuits that are now pending reveal that the pharmaceutical company suppressed the early linkage, which of course is coming back to haunt them in spades now. There is a strong movement afoot by the pharmaceutical companies to shut down compounding pharmacies, the primary purveyors of phytohormone replacement therapy prescribed by naturopaths and those allopaths who are more and more prescribing them over the synthetics. Be well, Marcia Elston Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence, est. 1988 http://www.wingedseed.com Online 3/95 http://www.aromaconnection.org Group Blog 2/07 " Historically, the most terrible things - war, genocide and slavery - have resulted from obedience, not disobedience. " Howard Zinn > > > On Behalf Of susan > Wednesday, February 27, 2008 5:41 PM > > Re: breast cancer > > Just before reading your post I came across an article on > this very topic. Phytoestrogens v. synthetic estrogens and > whether they play different roles in the development or > protection of the body from certain cancers. The article > leaned toward the belief that phytoestrogens will block, not > contribute to estrogen-linked cancers. > I would like to believe this as well but without some well > done long term studies who can tell? So I suppose it's like > everything else-do the research and make your best judgement > based on the situation. Susan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 29, 2008 Report Share Posted February 29, 2008 Marcia, I feel as a scientist I have to defend this report last year on lavender/tea tree oil and gynecomastia. The scientific report was nothing more than a case study. On two separate occasions boys came to the physician with enlarged breasts. A history indicated that the boys had both used either lavender or lavender/tea tree oil. It is just a relationship is all, there was never the statement in the paper that it was the oils that caused it. So although there may have been assumptions made in the popular press by journalists who don't know how to read scientific papers, the scientists themselves were only reporting facts about their patients. They did take it one step further and found that lavender oil stimulated growth of breast cells in culture. But again, one study does not establish cause and effect. The way science works is as a pyramid with one study building upon another. The way journalism works is through sensationalism - unfortunately things get messed up between the two. Just please don't blaim science for a mistake made by journalism. Cindy Jones Sagescript Institute, llc http://www.sagescript.com Botanicals, Distillates, Micorbiology > We on Aromaconnection have reported extensively debunking the occurrence of > Gynecomastia using lavender/tea tree in pre-pubescent boys last year. It is > the opinion of many of us that the research was flawed . . . Check out: > http://www.aromaconnection.org/lavendertea_treegynecomastia/index.html > > Many of us believe that the popularity of both essential oils prompted this > bad research and a response in the medical community to discourage use of > both (which of course they can't patent and control) . . . Resulting in an > unprecedented media blast of the NEJM paper across the country, picked up by > the blogosphere. > > Be well, > Marcia Elston > Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence, est. 1988 > http://www.wingedseed.com Online 3/95 > http://www.aromaconnection.org Group Blog 2/07 > " Historically, the most terrible things - war, genocide and slavery - have > resulted from obedience, not disobedience. " > Howard Zinn > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 29, 2008 Report Share Posted February 29, 2008 Cindy, Wasn't it also a possibility that the oils used were not pure and additives and syntetics could have also been in the oils that caused the problem. I agree with you that sensationalized journalism took over and scared people. Essential oils are good when using pure ones where you know how they are grown and distilled. You just have to be wise with your source for the oils. Laura An Laura Ann Grymes, LMT Licensed Massage Therapist Wellness massage with an agape touch! 979-204-9393 agape.wellness.massage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 29, 2008 Report Share Posted February 29, 2008 I'm in a hurry and don't want to be abrupt . . . But, Cindy, did you read all of the rebuttals on Aromaconnection? The NEJM study was flawed in many ways and several scientists/doctors I work with were surprised that NEJM even published it, it was so lacking in rigorous scientific scrutiny. Perhaps I made accusations tongue in cheek regarding the rush to the mass media blitz publicizing the study. However, that was unheard of and not simply by happenstance, IMO. It was a story that never would have made such wide reporting without a push. One cannot live in today's US without understanding that the major media corps politically cherry pick what they report and they have a strong motivation to pacify (if not cow to) their advertisers. I don't see how you, as a good scientist can support that particular research as it stands, there is so much lacking and a jump to the conclusions that Lav/teatree were the culprits without specifically naming the products nor examining any other ingredients in the products is simply bad science. Publishing this study leaves NEJM with far less credibility than once ascribed to what previously was probably the most respected medical journal in the US in the minds of other researchers. I to NEJM, I am very familiar with scientific research and understand how it progresses. As are many in our field. This particular study, however, smells foul and I stand by my opinion. I would think that you have to admit that occasionally (to be generous) there can be simply bad science and poorly conducted research. This happens to be one of those times. Nothing against science, or you as a scientist, for that matter. Be well, Marcia Elston Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence, est. 1988 http://www.wingedseed.com Online 3/95 http://www.aromaconnection.org Group Blog 2/07 " Historically, the most terrible things - war, genocide and slavery - have resulted from obedience, not disobedience. " Howard Zinn > > > On Behalf Of Cindy Jones > Friday, February 29, 2008 9:28 AM > > Re: breast cancer > > Marcia, I feel as a scientist I have to defend this report > last year on lavender/tea tree oil and gynecomastia. The > scientific report was nothing more than a case study. On two > separate occasions boys came to the physician with enlarged > breasts. A history indicated that the boys had both used > either lavender or lavender/tea tree oil. It is just a > relationship is all, there was never the statement in the > paper that it was the oils that caused it. > So although there may have been assumptions made in the > popular press by journalists who don't know how to read > scientific papers, the scientists themselves were only > reporting facts about their patients. > They did take it one step further and found that lavender oil > stimulated growth of breast cells in culture. But again, one > study does not establish cause and effect. The way science > works is as a pyramid with one study building upon another. > The way journalism works is through sensationalism - > unfortunately things get messed up between the two. Just > please don't blaim science for a mistake made by journalism. > > Cindy Jones > Sagescript Institute, llc > http://www.sagescript.com > Botanicals, Distillates, Micorbiology Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2008 Report Share Posted March 1, 2008 The point though is that this was just a case study is all - was not meant to be a rigorous scientific study. Maybe the fault lies in that it was published in NEJM rather than a lesser journal. But the purpose of a case study is just to document a clinical observation (several different lavender containing products used at the time of gynecomastia and no gynecomastia when products were not used) so that if at some point in the future another physician finds a similar observation it can be known that it is not the first time it happened. After numerous observations reported in the literature that are similar, then and only then, should a red flag be raised and people start thinking hmmmm, maybe there is something going on here. In this particular case though - probably because it was NEJM, the media jumped on it right away. I believe the paper also said that a number of different products were used rather than one brand that could be scrutinized. And lavender has been associated with breast growth before - althoug with decreased growth of breast cancer and extracts of lavender (perillyl alcohol) have been studied as a treatment for breast cancer. http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/88/16/1100 But I agree that the paper was not a rigorous study, but it also was not intended to be a rigorous study and should not be treated as if it were a rigorous study. It was not intended to have the weight of a double blinded randomized clinical trial, but when put in its context as a case study, I find it very intersting and will put it somewhere in the back of my mind to recall agains should there by anything else in the literature regarding breast growth and lavender - or perhaps I will rub lavender on my breasts to see if they will grow! ha, kidding. Cindy Jones Sagescript Institute, llc http://www.sagescript.com > I'm in a hurry and don't want to be abrupt . . . But, Cindy, did you read > all of the rebuttals on Aromaconnection? The NEJM study was flawed in many > ways and several scientists/doctors I work with were surprised that NEJM > even published it, it was so lacking in rigorous scientific scrutiny. > Perhaps I made accusations tongue in cheek regarding the rush to the mass > media blitz publicizing the study. However, that was unheard of and not > simply by happenstance, IMO. It was a story that never would have made such > wide reporting without a push. One cannot live in today's US without > understanding that the major media corps politically cherry pick what they > report and they have a strong motivation to pacify (if not cow to) their > advertisers. > > I don't see how you, as a good scientist can support that particular > research as it stands, there is so much lacking and a jump to the > conclusions that Lav/teatree were the culprits without specifically naming > the products nor examining any other ingredients in the products is simply > bad science. Publishing this study leaves NEJM with far less credibility > than once ascribed to what previously was probably the most respected > medical journal in the US in the minds of other researchers. I to > NEJM, I am very familiar with scientific research and understand how it > progresses. As are many in our field. This particular study, however, > smells foul and I stand by my opinion. > > I would think that you have to admit that occasionally (to be generous) > there can be simply bad science and poorly conducted research. This happens > to be one of those times. Nothing against science, or you as a scientist, > for that matter. > > Be well, > Marcia Elston > Samara Botane/Nature Intelligence, est. 1988 > http://www.wingedseed.com Online 3/95 > http://www.aromaconnection.org Group Blog 2/07 > " Historically, the most terrible things - war, genocide and slavery - have > resulted from obedience, not disobedience. " > Howard Zinn > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 Breast Cancer Breast cancer affects one in eight women during their lives. Breast cancer kills more women in the United States than any cancer except lung cancer. No one knows why some women get breast cancer, but there are a number of risk factors. Risks that you cannot change include Age - the chance of getting breast cancer rises as a woman gets older Genes - there are two genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, that greatly increase the risk. Women who have family members with breast or ovarian cancer may wish to be tested. Personal factors - beginning periods before age 12 or going through menopause after age 55 Kinds of Screening Tests Depression Tests and diagnosis Aortic Aneurysm Heart Disease: Abnormal Heart Rhythm Abnormal Heart Rhythm (Arrhythmia) Heart Disease: Angina High Cholesterol: Cholesterol Basics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.