Breast Cancer is Caused by Dietary and Metabolic Acids

Last week several articles appeared around the world
announcing the results of a seven-year diet experiment,
known as The Women’s Healthy Eating and Living (WHEL)
Randomized Trial, of more than 3,000 women with
breast cancer.

This governmental funded study (kicked off by a $5
million grant from the late Wal-Mart heir John Walton
with an additional $30 million in support from the
National Cancer Institute) found no benefit from
recommending that women with breast cancer eat
more fruits and vegetables, and less fat.
The chances of fewer recurrences and better survival
were not seen in women previously treated for breast
cancer after changes in diet achieved during this
study. As a result of this paper, originally published
in the Journal of the American Medical Association, more
people now may believe healthier eating will not help
women prevent or treat breast cancer.

There are many things wrong with this study such as
the following:

1) What fruits were they eating? Were they eating less
or more acidic fruits that can lead to acidic breasts or
more acid in the fatty tissues? Some of these acidic
fruits are apple, orange, pear, banana, pineapple and
all other high sugar fruits. Remember, cancer
is not a cell it is an acidic liquid that spoils cells.

The breasts are a depository for dietary and
metabolic acid from the blood that are not being
eliminated through urination, perspiration, respiration
or defecation.

2) What vegetables were they eating? There are many
vegetables that are acidic to the blood and tissues
that are not helpful in a cancerous state and should not
be eaten – such as potato, beet and carrot.

For a complete list of all acidic fruits and vegetables
that may increase acidity in the blood and tissues,
read The pH Miracle for Weight Loss by Dr. Robert
and Shelley Young.

http://www.phmiracleliving.com

3) How many servings of GREEN fruits and vegetables
which are alkalizing to the blood and tissues did
these women eat? I recommend 9 to 12 servings a day.

4) Were these women hydrating with alkaline fluids and
were they drinking at least 3 to 4 liters of high pH
water every day?

5) How many were drinking coffee, tea or alcohol and
how much? Coffee, tea and alcohol are major contributors
to an acidic body that can lead to cancerous breasts.

6) How much meat were these women eating daily?
You cannot lose weight if you are eating meat. Meat
congests the bowels and limits proper elimination.
Eating meat increases nitric, uric, sulphuric, and
phosphoric acid which increases a womans risk for
cancerous breasts.

7) In the study the women described as eating
“a dietary pattern very high in vegetables, fruit,
and fiber and low in fat” did not lose any body
weight at any time during the study–in fact, they
gained a small amount.

They were, on average, obese at 161.7 pounds (73.5 Kg)
when they began the study and 6 years later they were
still obese, weighing 163 pounds (74.1 Kg). Nor did
their average weights differ from the women who were
not advised to change their diet (the control group).

Proof that the data collected from asking the women
what they ate was evidence that they were living, eating
and thinking acidic.

The women eating “a dietary pattern very high in
vegetables, fruit, and fiber and low in fat” were
reported to have decreased their daily calorie intake
by an average of 181 calories (1719 initially, and
1538 six years later), yet they gained weight.
At every sixth month data collection they reported
consuming at least 100 fewer calories daily than
before the experiment began. A 100-calorie-plus
daily deficit over a month would cause a one pound
weight loss, over a year that would be 12 pounds,
and over the entire 6 years of study the women
should have achieved trim body weight, unless they
were eating acidic foods and living an acidic lifestyle.
They gained weight because the body retains fat as
a depository for dietary and/or metabolic acids that
are not being eliminated through the bowels, urine,
lung or skin.

Remember that obesity is not a fat problem but an
acid problem and acid causes cancer!

The reason the women in the study put on weight and
didn’t lose weight is because the body will aways retain
fat to buffer acid to protect the organs that sustain life.

8) The WHEL study is further proof of my theory that
ALL cancers are caused by dietary and metabolic acids.
The biggest breast cancer and prostate cancer causing
acid is lactic acid from dairy products.

The highest rates of breast cancer in the world are in
Ireland and Norway. These two countries have
the highest breast cancer rates in the world because
they love their dairy products – cheese, milk, yogurt
and ice cream.

If you want to increase your risk for breast cancer or
prostate cancer all you need to do is eat liberal
amounts of dairy products.

It is important to note that there was no mention that the
women in the WHEL study eliminated dairy products from their
diet! Could this have been the reason why all these women
could not lose weight and were still at risk?

9) The biggest problem with this recent study is
that there was no understanding of what foods
alkalize the body to prevent or reverse breast
cancer and what foods acidify the body that can cause
cancerous breasts.(The word cancer is an adjective
not a noun. There is no such thing as a cancer cell
or breast cancer. There is such a thing as a
cancerous cell or cancerous breast tissue. Cancer is
a liquid that flows to every part of your body.)

To prevent any cancerous state of the body, including
the breasts, you must maintain the body’s alkaline
design through proper elimination of dietary and
metabolic acids. We do not get old we mold.

My recommendation is to eat at least 9 to 12
servings of ALKALINE FRUITS and VEGETABLES like
avocado, cucumber, tomato, lemon, lime, peppers,
broccoli, spinach, celery, parsley, kale, collard
greens, just to name a few.

The formula for cancerous breasts or healthy
breasts is very simple:

1) Acidic lifestyle and diet = acidic or cancerous
breasts.

2) Alklaine lifesytle and diet = healthy and energetic
body and healthy alkaline breasts.

The findings of The Women’s Healthy Eating and
Living (WHEL) Randomized Trial, of more than
3,000 women with breast cancer is an example
of scientific fraud.

Let me share with you an example of how
researchers can come to their unscientific
conclusions. The following, I believe, is a
perfect example of how ridiculous these findings
can be.

The bottom line – it is all a matter of perception
and interpretation of the data and the scientist(s)
understanding of the truth of matter!

So here we go with my example of today’s scientific
research conclusions on breast cancer in America:

1) Japanese folks eat very little fat and have less
breast cancer than Americans.

2) Mexican folks eat a lot of fat and have less breast
cancer than Americans.

3) Chinese folks eat very few fruits and vegetables and
have less breast cancer than Americans.

4) Greeks eat a lot of fruits and vegetables and have
less breast cancer than Americans.

5) Germans drink a lot of beer and eat sausage but
have less breast cancer than Americans.

Conclusion: Eat and drink whatever you like being
American is what causes breast cancer and kills you!

My so-called scientific conclusion is just as ridiculous
as the findings that fruits and veggies do not prevent
or reduce the incidences of breast cancer or that
eating grapefruit may increase your risk for breast
cancer. All three conclusions are unscientific,
ridiculous, false, and misleading.

I believe the most important factor for maintaining
incredible health, energy and vitality is the
“pH factor”. If you maintain the alkaline design
of your body and keep your body fluids free from acid at:

1) Blood pH – 7.365
2) Lymphatic fluid pH – 7.365 t0 7.4
3) Extracellular fluid pH – 7.365 to 7.4
4) Urine pH – 7.2 or better
5) Bowel elimination pH – 7.2 or better
6) Saliva pH – 7.2 or better
7) Stomach pH – 7.2 or better
8) Small intestine pH – 8.2 or better
9) Large intestine pH – 7.2 or better
10) Sweat pH – 7.2 or better
11) Tears pH – 7.2 or better

you will live a long, vibrant, fit and healthy life.

There is only one cause of ALL sickness and dis-ease
and that cause is the over-acidification of the blood
and then tissues due to an inverted way of living,
eating and thinking.

And if there is only one cause of ALL sickness and
dis-ease then there is only one treatment – alkalize
and energize the body with green foods, green drinks
and green living.

Remember when you are green you are clean, and,
the human organism is alkaline by design but
acidic by function. Maintain the alkaline
design and live a life full of health and energy.

In love and healing light,

Dr. Robert O. Young

PS For the truth about cancer may I suggest
listening to my 8 CD set called:
The pH Miracle for Cancer. To order your set
of The pH Miracle for Cancer go to:

http://www.phmiracleliving.com/audios.htm

PSS The following is an email I received from
Dr. John McDougall concerning the latest study on
breast cancer. I encourage you to read
Dr. McDougall’s perspective on this
cancer study.

Study Fails to Show Benefits of Fruits and Veggies
for Breast Cancer Patients

Women are Blamed, but the Investigators Were at
Fault

The meat and dairy industry must have been laughing
all the way to the bank on Tuesday July 17, 2007
when headlines worldwide announced the results of a
seven-year diet experiment, known as The Women’s
Healthy Eating and Living (WHEL) Randomized Trial,
of more than 3,000 women with breast cancer.

This government funded study (kicked off by a $5
million grant from the late Wal-Mart heir John
Walton with an additional $30 million in support
from the National Cancer Institute) found no
benefit from recommending that women with breast
cancer eat more fruits and vegetables, and less fat.

The chances of fewer recurrences and better survival
were not seen in women previously treated for breast
cancer after changes in diet achieved during this study.
As a result of this paper, originally published in the
Journal of the American Medical Association, more people
now believe healthier eating will not help women
prevent or treat breast cancer.

Incontrovertible Facts Show Women Made Few Changes

Data collected by asking the study participants
about what they ate suggested they were eating more
fruits and vegetables and less fat after being
given instructions dictated by the study guidelines.

But people don’t always tell the truth–they often
want to please the investigators, so they tell them
what they think they want to hear, which in this
case was clearly inaccurate.

The women described as eating “a dietary pattern
very high in vegetables, fruit, and fiber and low
in fat” did not lose any body weight at any time
during the study–in fact, they gained a small amount.

They were, on average, obese at 161.7 pounds (73.5 Kg)
when they began the study and 6 years later they were
still obese, weighing 163 pounds (74.1 Kg). Nor did
their average weights differ from the women who were
not advised to change their diet (the control group).

Proof that the data collected from asking the women
what they ate was inaccurate. The women eating “a
dietary pattern very high in vegetables, fruit, and
fiber and low in fat” were reported to have decreased
their daily calorie intake by an average of 181
calories (1719 initially, and 1538 six years later),
yet they gained weight. At every sixth month data
collection they reported consuming at least 100 fewer
calories daily than before the experiment began.
A 100-calorie-plus daily deficit over a month would
cause a one pound weight loss, over a year that would
be 12 pounds, and over the entire 6 years of study
the women should have achieved trim body weight.
They gained weight.

The differences in foods consumed between the two
groups were caused by the control group reporting
that they ate less fruit and more fat over the
study period–not by any improvement in the
intervention group’s diet, other than 2 more
vegetable servings a day. Yet, rather then writing
about the minor absolute changes in the diet made
by the intervention group, they boasted of the
relative differences between the intervention and
control groups–reporting impressive figures like:
“At 4 years, relative differences in mean intake
between study groups were +65% for vegetable servings,
+25% for fruit servings, +30% for fiber, and -13%
for energy intake from fat.

Pierce, J. P. et al. JAMA 2007;298:289-298.
Copyright restrictions may apply. JAMA

The Authors Deceived the Public

Fraud is intentional deception resulting in injury
to another person. The authors deceived the public
by claiming they were able to cause the “adoption
of a dietary pattern very high in vegetables, fruit,
and fiber and low in fat.”

Their concluding statement was, “… during a mean
7.3-year follow-up, we found no evidence that
adoption of a dietary pattern very high in vegetables,
fruit, and fiber and low in fat vs a 5-a-day fruit
and vegetable diet prevents breast cancer recurrence
or death among women with previously treated early
stage breast cancer.” These words reflect the tone
of the entire article–one of a successful experiment,
not a failure–and led the public and press to believe
that women in the intervention group made substantial
changes in their diet. The result was headlines like:
“No Cancer Benefit Found In Mega-Veggie-Diet Study,”
“Dietary Hopes Dashed for Breast Cancer Patients,”
“Intensive Diet Doesn’t Prevent Breast Cancer:
Study,” “Healthiest Diet Made Little Difference to
Breast Cancer Survivors,” and “Fruits, Veggies Don’t
Stop Cancer Return.”

But the conscientious reader who studies the data
correctly concludes: Even if the data reported were
an accurate reflection of what these women did,
two more vegetable servings a day is not a diet
“very high in vegetables, fruit, and fiber and
low in fat.”

Neither lack of intelligence nor carelessness
caused the report to be written in a manner that
led the public and press to incorrect conclusions;
I believe the authors intentionally deceived the
public. One possible motivation for distorting the
truth was to save face.

They wasted $35 million dollars (much of it
taxpayer money) by feeding women with breast
cancer an ineffective diet. Rather than admit
their mistakes, they chose to distort the real
meaning of the findings of their study, and
effectually, deprive women of an opportunity to
become healthier by eating more fruits and
vegetables.

Sixty years of scientific research, involving tens
of thousands of published articles, has identified
the rich Western diet as the cause of breast cancer
and many scientific studies have shown that a
meaningful change in diet will allow women with
breast cancer to live longer and healthier. Yet,
one poorly-executed, well-publicized, study may
turn the tide for better health for women.

When Asked, Women Will Change

Breast cancer is a fatal disease and women will
do almost anything to live. They will endure
poisoning by toxic chemotherapy, burning with
radiation, and mutilation from breast-amputating
mastectomy; in the hopes of living a few more days.

Obviously, if asked to do so, and given proper
support from their doctors and dietitians, they
would do something as simple, safe, cost-effective,
and enjoyable as eating oatmeal and bean burritos
while avoiding beefsteaks and cheese omelets.

In The Women’s Healthy Eating and Living (WHEL)
Randomized Trial they continued the same meat-,
dairy-, oil-, and environmental chemical-laden
diet that got them in trouble in the first place,
with minor modifications. The investigators,
not the women, should be held responsible for the
fact that even the instructions to eat, “5 vegetable
servings plus 16 oz of vegetable juice; 3 fruit
servings; 30 g of fiber; and 15% to 20% of energy
intake from fat,” were followed poorly. The
full cancer-inhibiting benefits of low-fat,
plant-foods were never offered to these women.

A true test of diet for the prevention and treatment
of breast cancer would follow the model of the diet
of women worldwide who have the least chance of
contracting breast cancer and the best chance of
surviving it. These are women who follow a diet
based on starches, like from rural Asia (rice),
Africa (millet), Mexico (corn), New Guinea
(sweet potatoes) and Peru (potatoes).

The few women, who do get breast cancer in these
societies, also live longer than their Western
counterparts.

Unfortunately, a serious diet study on breast cancer
is no more likely to occur than would a study on
heart disease, obesity, or type-2 diabetes–diseases
well accepted to be due to the Western diet. Current
financial incentives are focused on maintaining the
status quo.

So, until the revolution against the controlling
interests of big business occurs you will be left
to your own means to protect yourself and your
family.

References:
2007 John McDougall, MD
The pH Miracle for Cancer

Copyright © 2007 by Robert O. Young, Ph.D.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s