A Simple Alternative Cancer Treatment With Decades of Medical Research to Back it Up

There are many different alternative remedies and therapies for cancer. Unfortunately, hardly any of these alternative therapies are backed by solid scientific principles and research. Most are just “snake oil” and sleazy clinics in foreign countries.

There really is an alternative treatment, however, that is backed by solid scientific research dating back several decades. It uses what scientists know about cancer cells to reduce and eliminate any type of cancer in all parts of the body. For decades, scientists have been studying the relationship between sugars and cancer. The findings have been consistent over the years—reducing the sugar glucose in the body reduces cancer growth. Eliminating glucose can, quite simply, eliminate cancer.

This process is scientifically valid because of what is known about cancer cells. Like all the cells in our body, cancer cells use the glucose manufactured from the carbohydrates in our diet for energy. Cancer cells, scientists have discovered, are particularly “greedy” and require a relatively high amount of glucose to function, grow and multiply. Without glucose, they eventually die.

What makes the elimination of glucose from the diet such a valid treatment for cancer has to do with what our body is capable of doing in order to supply the rest of our cells with energy. Unlike cancer cells, the cells that make up the rest of our body can use the energy extracted from lipids or fats for energy. Ketone bodies, or ketones, are produced in the absence of enough carbohydrates in order to power the body’s cells. While healthy cells can use ketones for energy efficiently and safely, cancer cells cannot use them at all. If the diet is changed just right and some simple medications are used in just a few days the cancer cells can be killed.

Scientists understand the process involved to encourage the body to create ketones for energy. Different treatment plans involving diets high in lipids and low in carbohydrates have been tested for use with many different types of ailments. All the results show that cancer is a perfect candidate for responding to this type of plan.

So many people with cancer find themselves at a point where they want to do something proactive to fight their encroaching disease. This scientifically valid treatment plan provides something concrete that cancer sufferers can do to attack their cancer using their body’s own mechanisms for creating an alternative energy source for their healthy cells.

You should learn more about how you can activate your body’s natural processes to create and environment inside your body where cancer cell cannot survive. This alternative therapy is backed by science and is very simple to understand.

Gout Medical Research Suggests Coffee May Help

Recently, gout medical studies have found that coffee can actually be beneficial for treating gout. The results of these studies are very interesting as coffee has long been considered a beverage that should be avoided by gout sufferers, as it is believed caffeine raises uric acid levels (increased uric acid levels in the blood is the main culprit behind gout attacks. Gout is characterized by swelling and intense pain in an affected joint – commonly the big toe). However, though caffeine may still be a risk factor, there appears to be an ingredient(s) in coffee that has the opposite effect.

Gout medical research that concluded in the spring of 2007 discovered that the more coffee men consume the lower their risk of gout. In this Canadian/American study which was published in the Arthritis & Rheumatism journal June 2007, it was found that men who drank a minimum of 4 cups of coffee daily, lowered their gout risk by as much as 40%.

The study was based on data that was collected from over 45,000 male medical professionals who participated in the study. It was found that after 12 years of study, just over 750 of the more than 45,000 men who drank tea and coffee developed gout. Based on self-reports kept by each medical professional, those conducting the study were able to determine that while tea had no effect, the more coffee the men consumed, the more they reduced their risk of developing gout.

The gout medical study found that men, who drank 1 – 3 cups of coffee per day, lowered their risk of a gout attack by 8%. However, those who drank 4 – 5 cups per day reduced their risk by 40%. Additionally, those men who proved to be ‘coffee addicts’ and drank 6 or more cups per day had almost a 60% lower gout risk.

On the other hand, it was discovered that men who drank 1 – 3 cups of decaffeinated coffee reduced their risk by 33%, while those who drank 4 cups of decaf or more, only reduced the risk of gout by 27%.

Although the medical research team does not know what the exact substance or substances within coffee that reduce the risk of gout, the gout medical team thinks that phenol chlorogenic acid, a strong antioxidant that exists in coffee, may be one of the major factors. Furthermore, it should be mentioned that the team believes that caffeine in coffee does not contribute to the reduction, as tea which also contains caffeine does not appear to offer any benefits.

It is important to note that the researchers focused their study on men aged 40 and older. Their reason for this was because men 40 years of age and older make up the highest gout population. Therefore, although coffee appears to make a difference in the average man that fits this age group, it is not known if coffee has the same gout reducing effect on women and younger men.

More studies will need to be conducted to confirm the precise reasons why coffee reduces the risk of gout. Therefore, while increasing the number of cups of coffee you drink per day may lower your chances of gout, the increase in coffee may not be beneficial for other health conditions. Therefore, be sure to talk to your doctor about the gout medical coffee study, and seek his/her advice before you consider increasing your coffee consumption.

Learn About Medical Research

Stories on TV, in the newspapers, and on the Internet are seen almost every day talking about some kind of new medical research or development. Most of these turn out to be helpful and some of them turn out to be dangerous, but as long as there are diseases and problems to be solved people will keep trying to find ways to help people and protect them from physical and mental difficulties. The problem with a lot of medical research is that one research study contradicts other research studies and therefore it’s hard to know which study to believe. Whether you should try new treatments or not often comes down to your doctor’s recommendations and how you really feel about the value that these treatments will have for your specific condition versus the risks you might actually be taking. Some of these medical research stories are a little bit farfetched, too, in the way that they tout something as a ‘cure’ for some disease or problem, such as cancer. There aren’t any actual cures for cancer just yet, so it’s unfair to release information that says there are.

When you start to look at whether specific medical research is really valuable to you, one of the main things to look for is whether it’s been sensationalized or just reported. Things with huge headlines that talk about wonderful cures and how great everything is are often not as realistic as a well-written and cautiously optimistic article about progress being made into new medications or treatments for a particular health problem. There should be background for the story and there should be a fair balance. Something that’s too one-sided isn’t a good idea either, because it doesn’t show you that there really are two sides to every story. Does the story tie into advertising? That’s a big thing to consider when looking at whether it’s realistic or not. By looking at all of these things and weighing them carefully a person can be better suited to make a determination of whether there are problems with a medical research story or whether it presents legitimate information.

What Started The Sanford-Burnham Medical Research Institute

The Sanford-Burnham Medical Research Institute is a non-profit medical research institute with two locations in La Jolla, California and Lake Nona, Florida. The more than 750 scientists at Sanford-Burnham are focused on revealing the fundamental molecular causes of various diseases, with research including topics such as, cancer, neuroscience, stem cell research, diabetes and obesity.

Research at Sanford-Burnham is supported by funding from National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, and Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation among others, and partnerships with pharmaceutical companies such as Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development.[1] In 2008, Burnham was awarded a $97.9 million grant by NIH to establish a high-throughput screening screening center.[2]

History

Former Burnham Institute for Medical Research logo

William (Bill) H. Fishman, M.D., Ph.D., and his wife Lillian Fishman, M.Ed., left Boston, Massachusetts, to found an independent research institution dedicated to the then-new concept of oncodevelopment in 1976.

The Fishmans, who had then retired from Tufts University School of Medicine, moved across the country and established the La Jolla Cancer Research Foundation in San Diego, California to conduct biomedical research. The institute was established in 1976 as the La Jolla Cancer Research Foundation, and was renamed the Burnham Institute for Medical Research in 1996 for businessman Malin Burnham, after he joined with an anonymous donor to give $10 million. In 2007, T. Denny Sanford gave the institute $20 million through his Sanford Health, allowing it to create the Sanford Children’s Health Research Center, which has sites in Sioux Falls and La Jolla, CA, the latter within the campus of Sanford-Burnham. In 2010, the institute re branded to its current name following a $50 million pledge of support from Sanford. [3]

The center originally focused on oncodevelopment, the study of developmental biology in conjunction with oncology as a means to better understand cancer.

Research

Sanford-Burnham was founded with the primary focus on cancer research. The institute employees more than 1,000 people, of which 750 are scientists. The scientists who work at Sanford-Burnham include biologists, chemists, biophysicists, engineers, and computer scientists. Sanford-Burnham ranks consistently among the world’s top 25 organizations for its research impact, according to Thomson Scientific data. It also ranks among the top four research institutes in the United States in National Institutes of Health grant funding.

The institute now conducts a broad array of medical research activities and is home to five centers:

an NCI-designated Cancer Center;
the Del E. Webb Center for Neurosciences, Aging and Stem Cell Research];
the Infectious and Inflammatory Disease Center;
the Diabetes and Obesity Research Center;
and the Sanford Children’s Health Research Center.

In 2006, Sanford-Burnham established a center for bionanotechnology research at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

The Vascular Mapping Center, led by medical researcher Dr. Erkki Ruoslahti, is focused on discovering peptides that target cancer cells and developing methods to deliver therapeutic agents to those cells.

Stem cell research

Sanford-Burnham is one of four institutes that have joined together to carry out stem cell research in a partnership renamed for T. Denny Sanford after he donated $30 million to the effort in 2008. The Sanford Consortium for Regenerative Medicine in December 2009 broke ground on a $126 million research facility following more than a year of financing delays wrought by California’s budget problems.

Select scientific achievements
1971: Eva Engvall, one of the scientists who invented ELISA in 1971, worked at Sanford-Burnham. She continues to serve as an Adjunct Professor.
1984: Discovered cell adhesion regulator RGD (Erkki Ruoslahti, M.D., Ph.D.)
1988: Collaborative discovery of the role TFG beta plays in tissue scarring. Based on this research, two clinical trials are underway: one for the treatment of pulmonary fibrosis and another for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma and melanoma (Erkki Ruoslahti, M.D., Ph.D.)
1992: Observed that the activity of common anti-cancer drugs requires “cell suicide” of the cancer cells (apoptosis) and subsequently discovered novel proteins important in apoptosis (John Reed, M.D., Ph.D.)
1997: Discovered peptides that home to specific organs. These peptides were later used as targeting elements to deliver nanoparticles into tumors and other sites of disease (Erkki Ruoshlahti, M.D., Ph.D.)
2001: Solved the 3-dimensional structure of the anthrax toxin, leading to the creation of the world’s most potent chemical inhibitor of anthrax (Robert Liddington, Ph.D.)
2009: Solved the crystal structure of the influenza hemagglutinin (H5) in complex with a broad spectrum neutralizing antibody (Robert Liddington, Ph.D.)
Collaboration and partnerships

Sanford-Burnham scientists routinely collaborate across disciplines and campuses. For example, Sanford-Burnham’s high-throughput screening center, the Conrad Prebys Center for Chemical Genomics, has robotics at both the La Jolla and Lake Nona campuses.

In addition, Sanford-Burnham has strong working relationships with a number of other organizations, including the University of California, San Diego, The Scripps Research Institute, the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, and Duke University’s Sarah W. Stedman Nutrition and Metabolism Center.

Sanford-Burnham also collaborates with pharmaceutical companies to move research breakthroughs from the lab out to the public. Recent agreements include partners such as Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development and Magellan Biosciences.

Training and education

Sanford-Burnham offers postdoctoral training for scientists who have completed their Ph.D. There are typically around 250 postdocs training at Burnham at any time.

Established in 2006, the Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences at Sanford-Burnham offers a Ph.D. degree in Molecular Medicine or Integrated Biosciences. The Graduate School trains students for careers in basic and translational research through a curriculum of focused, multi-disciplinary instruction. Sanford-Burnham is currently seeking accreditation with the Western Association of Schools and Colleges.

Sanford-Burnham also offers a joint graduate program with the University of California, San Diego in Molecular Pathology. [7]

References
^ “Burnham, Johnson & Johnson ink partnership”. http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/stories/2009/01/12/daily16.html.
^ “Burnham Awarded $97.9 Million NIH Grant to Expand Small-Molecule Screening and Discovery Center”. http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1540494/burnham_awarded_979_million_nih_grant_to_expand_smallmolecule_screening/.
^ Burnham Institute Gets $50M Gifta and Changes Name, GenomeWeb, January 26, 2010
^ “Health Sciences Campus”. University of Central Florida College of Medicine. http://med.ucf.edu/about/campus/index.asp. Retrieved 2009-07-28.
^ Open Message to Floridians
^ Burnham’s Partners & Collaborators in Florida
^ “Molecular Pathology Ph.D. program”. http://molpath.ucsd.edu/.
^ Burnham Institute Gets $50M Gifta and Changes Name, GenomeWeb, January 26, 2010
^ Burnham Institute Gets $50M Gifta and Changes Name, GenomeWeb, January 26, 2010
^ Sanford-Burnham Promotes Vuori to President as Reed Focuses More on Externals, GenomeWeb, April 13, 2010
Remember to learn more here

Researching Venues for Medical Research Jobs

The expansion of health care and pharmaceutical companies throughout the world has increased the number of medical research jobs. Medical research initiatives funded by taxpayers as well as corporate investors are designed for primary discoveries as well as secondary products. Primary discoveries are drugs, supplies and diagnostic equipment that fit within the original plan of action while secondary products arise from accidental discoveries during medical research. You can find medical research jobs involved in primary and secondary discoveries through a number of venues.

Researchers who want to participate in the creation of medical guidelines and standards can work with government labs. These laboratories approach medical research from two different fronts. Testing centres use medical researchers to look at proposed pharmaceuticals as well as random tests of products on the market to maintain consumer safety. Many government laboratories will conduct medical research on independent initiatives including emergency equipment needed for military personnel.

There are plenty of medical research jobs in universities throughout the United Kingdom for researchers dedicated to specific medical conditions. These positions allow young scientists and experienced researchers to combine their unique views on medical research to study long-standing maladies. Many universities have laboratories devoted to cancer, diabetes, AIDS and other physical problems that offer medical research jobs for scientists devoted to a single disease.

Researchers who want a steady pay-check as well as state of the art resources should look for medical research jobs at private laboratories. Pharmaceutical companies have extensive medical research departments that test pills, ointments and other solutions for medical problems. There are a multitude of independent laboratories funded by pharmaceutical and medical supply companies that conduct tests on products to meet government standards. These positions will continue to grow as pharmaceutical companies expand their range of products but many medical researchers are worried about their reputations while working in the private sector.

A niche market for medical researchers exists in non-profit and advocacy agencies looking for independent research. The number of medical research jobs in the non-profit field remains small though the growth in philanthropic efforts funding these positions has grown in the 21st century. These jobs combine the high-minded ethical standards associated with university work with the resources available to medical researchers in the private sector. The problem with advocacy and non-profit positions is the uncertainty associated with philanthropic funding. These positions are ideal for younger researchers in need of experience as well as older scientists who have built up a retirement fund from other positions.