Is BRCA1 The Only Cause of Breast Cancer?

You might've heard by now about Angelina Jolie's decision to have a mastectomy after discovering that she has the breast cancer gene BRCA1. Now Jolie has a right to do whatever she wants with her body, but the media should not make it look like her decision applies to everyone. There is a lot of misinformation being spurred by the medical establishment when it comes to the potential breast cancer gene or any other gene possibly linked to disease.

First, having the BRCA1 gene DOES NOT mean your automatically going to get breast cancer as there are many other factors involved in cancer. Nutritional, lifestyle, emotional, or other factors could also lead to the formation of cancer not just a single mutated gene. Even the medical establishment admits this.

But the medical community that treated Jolie chose to ignore the emerging science of epigenetics and the still uncertainty over whether genes really "cause" human disease. Do remember that the scientific-Pharmacuetical  industry establishment holds enormous sway over peoples view of health in general and their reactions to an announcement of disease (even I find myself influenced). Most people aren't going to question the "authorities". The Human Genome Project started awhile ago to research the "genetic code" of humans and a huge hoopla was made over the discovery of genes supposedly linked to disease. However, the Genome project failed because it didn't take into account that theres far more proteins then genes, RNA role, and  influence of the billions of bacteria living in our body (healthful and harmful). In the tradition of reductionary science, they thought that genes were lined up in an orderly fashion all with their own neat little function, but as it turns out much of the genes seemed to not have any purpose and that proteins play a much bigger role than even genes.

Genes alone are not the cause of disease. Epigenetics play an even bigger role, being any modifications to the genes except DNA itself. Epigenetics literally pulls the trigger, say, and can switch genes on or off. The very cell membranes changing the way genes express themselves in response to outside stimulators. Okay, maybe I'm getting a little deep here. My point is modern medicine has been following the typical reductionary, simple-minded approach of determinism for the last 50 years and more. Its not true that genes determine your fate.

Its also possible that the big scare over BRCA1 gene is motivated by profit. The tests for the gene alone cost  at least $3,000 due to corporations holding a patent on the gene, a billion-dollar industry in of itself. Not too long ago the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of corporate ownership of genes. Now this is sickening in itself because no corporation or anyone should be able to patent life (similar to GMO patents by the biotech industries).

Jolie can do whatever she wants (though I doubt these celebrities breasts were real to start). But the media and medical establishment should not make it look like everyone has to do the same. Their belief in certian genes is based on an outdated medical paradigm.

Substitutes For Junkfood

You probably know by now that junkfood is unhealthy. Cookies, cakes, crackers, or anything else heavily processed is bad for your health due to the additives and low nutrient content. Below is my list of healthier alternatives to common junkfood though many of them are also not healthy there better than the mainstream crap. If your just trying to give up a Standard American Diet it can be difficult sometimes to know a replacement for certain foods or how to fulfill a craving in the meantime.

1. Replace soda with sparkling water, kombucha, or tea.

As a kid, I liked drinking soda with its wonderfully cold, fizzy texture, but now that I'm older I know its terrible for my health. Soda is literally nothing more than concentrated liquid sugar. A better alternative is sparkling water (fizzy), kombucha for its good bacteria, and tea for the phytochemicals.

2. Make homemade deserts. 

Perhaps this one seems like a no-brainer because anyone whos ever read an ingredient label on store-bought  desserts knows they contain many mysterious ingredients. Everything from Maltodextrin to diglycerides. Really you have no idea where the ingredients originated from so its worthwhile to try making more desserts yourself. Besides cookies are so simple almost anyone can make them.

3. Go through a period of sugar detox.

Sugar detoxes are when you cut out sugar either cold turkey or gradually give it up. Either way its a good idea to go through a period of giving up sugar entirely. Sugar is a nutritionally-devoid substance thats highly addictive and can lead to health problems from obesity to cancer.

4. Get more of the right fats.

From the Weston A. Price foundation, you can improve your health simply by adding in more of the good fats found in eggs, grassfed meat, fish oil, and fermented foods like yogurt. When you crave sweets your body is actually craving the fats found in wholesome foods that also contain the right complex of substances including carbs and sugar.

Codex Panders To Industry Again

At the 2013 Codex meeting in Beijing there was the usual industry profit-pandering to the most unhealthiest food guidelines. Oh, sure their worried about a few additives and natural contaminants. But rarely do you hear what should be an uproar over the numerous artificial poisons contaminating our food supply (and with globalization its only going to get worst). The Codex committee could actually be useful if they knew something about real health and nutrition, for example:

• Protect small and traditional farms and stop supporting environmentally and health destructive mega-factory farming.

• Discourage the numerous additives and preservatives tainting the food supply and encourage a healthful diet of wholesome food.

• Stop tearing down rainforest to plant more soybeans and instead turn them over to wildlife and permaculture.

• Make healthy food less expensive not more by stopping the support and subsidizing of factory farms.

• Give nutrients from wholesome food importance over cheap empty calories from processed factory food.

Junk Diet Equals Junk Health

A junk diet equals junk health.

Its always worth reminding yourself of the value of wholesome food. Despite the misinformation of mainstream nutritionists, ignorant doctors, uninformed family members, or anyone else you can still keep your head above water by reminding yourself that food DOES affect your health in every way.

Nearly since the turn of the 19th century sugar consumption has gone up despite physical activity going down. If people who spent 10 plus hours a day working the fields consumed very little sugar then why would anyone who sits around all day need the energy boost of sugar (such is common in the modern world)? Indeed, before the 1700s sugar used to be considered a luxury item and sugar consumption has gone up ever since along with chronic disease. Americans are also some of the most wasteful nation when it comes to food, throwing out $180 billion in food yearly then they complain theirs not enough to eat.

Most processed packaged food in the US is heavily sugar-laden along with salt, rancid oils (soy, safflower), artificial preservatives, and the pesticides used in factory farm production. Today the average American consumes 152 pounds of sugar a year when it was only 3 pounds a year two hundred years ago. Diabetes and weight gain have long been linked with heavy sugar consumption such as a JAMA study where women who were followed for ten years gained more weight and diabetes from higher sugar consumption. High sugar intake may even be linked to pancreatic cancer. Of course, this is old news to anyone who follows the alternative medicine community where food has long been known as a cornerstone of health.

I'm not trying to make this about food "snobs" or low-income people. Actually, if anything I blame the Junkfood companies for making their crap readily available and socially acceptable. The food system in America needs to be overhauled so that everyone can have access to wholesome, organic food. I blame the medical establishment thats ignorant about the role of food allergies and gut dysbiosis in addiction to processed food.

Its also a cultural thing to consume heavy amounts of sugar-laden junkfood, too. Filling up on empty calories from sugar offers no nutritional value, but still people waste money on ice cream and cakes. A controversy from a few months ago over whether or not food stamp recipients should be allowed to buy soda really misses the point still: no one needs soda anyways so why should anyone be allowed to buy it? Once we acknowledge the health reasons that people consume processed food (addiction, allergies) then we can address the social and economic factors. Hell, I'm not here to judge anyones situation.

Recently, I've been reading Radical Medicine by Dr. Louisa Williams, which is about obtaining your best health by using diet as well as other holistic therapies. It gets to the root cause of health problems such as obesity, food addiction, and sugar cravings and why the Junkfood companies have been so successful at getting people hooked onto their crap products. The interesting theory of gut dysbiosis is explained in detail. Basically, its caused by years of heavy antibiotic use along with consumption of processed food that upset the naturally-occuring bacteria found in the gut. This disruption of bacteria leads to immune dysfunction along with other conditions. It was also interesting how she mentioned that food allergies can become a part of someones personality. Perhaps their is more to our collective defense of toxic industrial food and agriculture system than just people lacking "willpower" and education.

"But Healthy People Get Sick And Die Anyways..."

One of the common arguments from the "anti-healthfood" crowd is that people still remain healthy in spite of having a bad diet/lifestyle or else "healthnuts" get ill despite having no risk factors. All true and I don't deny it. However, sometimes you need to know the exact definition of a healthnut and a nonhealthy person in order to get a clear idea of whats involved in their overall health outcomes. The anti-alternative health crowd seems to be good at twisting words and cherrypicking data to fit their own agenda. One of the major arguments is that the rising disease rates since the 20th century is not due to toxic chemicals (this is often disregarded as a conspiracy theory) and increasing reliance on processed, denatured foods. Its due to increasing population and people living longer (which I also don't disagree with the first one). But theres many unanswered questions that can't simply be explained away by living longer, larger population, or good genetics.

• People may be living longer sometimes well past 60, but old age has come to be a time filled with disabilities and pain. People aren't necessarily dying though and are instead living with disabilities that reduce their quality of life. Modern medicine only accounts for quantity not quality of life. Even if extending life means pouring toxins into people, which Big Pharma tends to view elderly population as their top clients.
• Obesity is a hot topic these days with all corners of the health world putting out their own theories behind the epidemic. Were people obese centuries ago or even 50 years ago? Obviously something has changed in the environment and food to have such a large population of overweight individuals. How can obesity be caused by "better nutrition" when its been related to so many diseases like diabetes and heart disease?
• Why do pets get sick and die before their time? Are companion animals simply "living longer" like their owners and thus more likely to become ill or could the environment diet explain disease in pets? Theres millions of pets living in households across America and animals have existed throughout history right along side humans. However, its only today that researchers are discovering pets are full of toxins and its already known that cats can be negatively affected by common pesticides and rodenticides. There was a time when pets lived well past 8 years without a problem, but now it seems so many of them are getting sick or dying younger than before.
• Theres been many reported disease clusters around toxic waste sites where the rates of cancer, immune system problems, and birth defects are abnormally high. Going back to the 1970s you can find a whole history of high disease prevalence in humans and wildlife that live around a former toxic waste dump such as an affected community in Pennsylvania.