Cancer, could it be caused by the way you think

[Orange]

I was watching a program the other day and this guy was saying in some studys they had taken shows that caner is more promiment in people that have alot of worrys held back.What do you think of this? and have you heard of it before? could you give me some links to anywhere else that you have read about this?
thanks.
Gary

[DarKnight]

Sounds like a lot of BS to me. Its true that the mental state influences your health, but I don't really see how it can generate an abnormal celular development.

[Kaspian]

The concept that our thoughts and emotions can create illness in our bodies is one of the key points in Luise Hay's books Heal Your Body and You Can Heal Your Life.

[Elixir]

How cancer is caused is a huge misconception by many people...if you don't have the gene for skin cancer, then you will never get skin cancer on matter how many hours you bake yourself in the sun. That's why some people smoke all their life and never get lung cancer, whereas someone who never smokes might get it...we all have these cancer genes and they won't turn on unless an environmental factor triggers it. The thing is, we don't have the technology to know which cancer genes we have..so just try to be careful in all aspects.

[Cantando]

Animals can get cancer as well, and before you say that's because pets pick up the vibes from their owners, wild animals can also develop it.

The research on cancer in wild animals is difficult to perform and somewhat inconclusive at the moment, but it is currently thought to be directly related to pollution. Fish quite often develop tumours as a result of living in polluted rivers.

[escapee]

Warburg hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Warburg's hypothesis was postulated by the Nobel laureate Otto Heinrich Warburg in 1924.[1] He hypothesized that cancer, malignant growth, and tumor growth are caused by the fact that tumor cells mainly generate energy (as e.g. adenosine triphosphate / ATP) by non-oxidative breakdown of glucose (a process called glycolysis). This is in contrast to "healthy" cells which mainly generate energy from oxidative breakdown of pyruvate. Pyruvate is an end-product of glycolysis, and is oxidized within the mitochondria. Hence, according to Warburg, cancer should be interpreted as a mitochondrial dysfunction. Warburg reported a fundamental difference between normal and cancerous cells to be the ratio of glycolysis to respiration; this observation is also known as the Warburg effect.

It is now known that cancer is caused by mutations in the genome of the cells in a process called malignant transformation, resulting in an uncontrolled growth of cells.[2][3] The metabolic differences observed by Warburg are now thought to be an adaption of cancer cells to the hypoxic (oxygen-deficient) conditions inside solid tumors, and therefore not the cause, as he claimed, but an effect of cancer.

Warburg articulated his hypothesis in a paper entitled The Prime Cause and Prevention of Cancer which he presented in lecture at the meeting of the Nobel-Laureates on June 30, 1966 at Lindau, Lake Constance, Germany. In this speech, Warburg presented evidence in support of the claim that anaerobiosis was a primary cause of cancerous cells. Put in his own words, "the prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar."[4]

If Warburg is right then there is only one primary cause of cancer, and that is cellular hypoxia. Bare in mind that there are probably hundreds of secondary causes which can lead to cellular hypoxia. Examples are chronic inflammation, Heavy metals, carcinogens, Malnutrition, virus infection (HPV, hepatitis ) and etc .


Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care - Abstract: Volume 9(4) July 2006 p 339-345 Oxidative metabolism in cancer growth.

Abstract:
Purpose of review: Recent evidence suggests that oxidative metabolism may have a key role in controlling cancer growth. This review will provide an overview of the evidence accumulated so far. More than 80 years ago, Otto Warburg suggested that impaired oxidative metabolism may cause malignant growth. This assumption, later known as Warburg's hypothesis, has been experimentally addressed for many decades. It employs multiple approaches including cell lines, implanted xenografts and other animal models, by biochemical methods to quantify glycolytic and mitochondrial fluxes and signaling pathways including the rates of intermediate metabolism, respiration and oxidative phosphorylation.

Recent findings: The hallmarks of cancer growth, increased glycolysis and lactate production in tumors, have raised attention recently due to novel observations suggesting a wide spectrum of oxidative phosphorylation deficits and decreased availability of ATP associated with malignancies and tumor cell expansion. The most recent findings suggest that forcing cancer cells into mitochondrial metabolism efficiently suppresses cancer growth, and that impaired mitochondrial respiration may even have a role in metastatic processes.

[Brutha]

How cancer is caused is a huge misconception by many people...if you don't have the gene for skin cancer, then you will never get skin cancer on matter how many hours you bake yourself in the sun.

That's wrong. For one there no such thing as the gen for skin cancer.

What is cancer?
For most cancers there are a few things that have to mutate. Things can mutate for a variety of reasons. That could be chemicals, radiaction or just normal errors in copying the DNA.
A protein that induces cell growth and devision has to be overproduced through a mutation.
In addition most cancers also need a mutation in some control gene that would otherwise let the cell die when that cell multiplies out of control. Cells with mutated control gens will also get more mutations because of the lack of control.

Know you could have gen mutations at the time you were born that make it more likely that one of many things that could mutate actually mutate. Human for example have normally two of each gene because we have each chromosome two times. Of one of those is already mutated or doesn't exist on one chromosome, it's a greater problem when the only one that left also mutates.

Once there is a cell like that it's normally the job of the immune system to find and destroy that cell.
The immune system get weaker of you think a lot of negative thoughts, so there could be a effect that increases your chances of having cancer.

In general cancer has no single course that can be predicted like deterministcally.
There have to happen a lot of errors in the body for cancer to develop. Pollution is one thing that can produce errors in the body.
If there happen more errors than the body can fix, cancer develops.

The thing is, we don't have the technology to know which cancer genes we have..

We do have the technology to diagnose monogenetic genetic illnesses.

[danas]

IMO negative emotions and bitterness which are not expressed and held inside, with time create weak points in the body, like a black hole, which can be quite easily filled with disease, including cancer.

We all get angry, but I believe it is very important to our health express and release these feelings as soon as they come.

[Keith]

To get back to the original poster's question, it seems plausible to me.

What is stress?
During fight-or-flight mode, our bodies deprioritise less urgent tasks such as digestion and immune function so that more energy is available to our cardiovascular systems et al. Chronic stress is 'just' ongoing fight-or-flight mode. Fight-or-flight mode is triggered by danger, and exactly what we perceive as 'dangerous' is a lot broader these days.

What about cancer prevention?
Cancer prevention is largely about applying antioxidants to free radicals to prevent them damaging our cells. It makes sense that this system would be deprioritised during fight-or-flight.

[hkalchemy]

Cancer is a complex and emotive subject. I don't believe there are any simple generalisations to be made here, except to say that a positive attitude probably helps. But this can be said of everything.

[lasti]

Sure, if you believe in subjective reality and IM.

[Illumination]

Don't think so.

Dr. Randy Pausch just passed away.

If you don't know him, Google his name...

[24evita]

To answer the original question can cancer be caused by stress/worry - the answer is 100% YES!

What most people do not realize is that with every negative thought and emotion we have biochemical reactions in our body that stimulate various reactions and if those reactions are negative they start to impact our body.

The problem with stress and negative thinking is that it does not necessarily mutate our cells for example like the sun does but it prevents reactions that fix/kill mutating cells from taking place as body is busy dealing with stress.

So although smoking, drinking, chemicals, metals and all the rest can be linked to cancer, stress is still the number one way to manifest cancerous cells in ones body.

Now having said that in terms of the other people talking about genes for it and such and animals getting it - let me make 2 quick points about that too.

In terms of genes - yes there are genes that make some people more SUSCEPTIBLE to a cancer but in no way does it mean you will get it. That gene will be greatly influenced by your diet, your way of life and your stress levels. That is why if you have a cancer gene in your family you are not doomed and gloomed. It just means you need to take your health more seriously and take appropriate measures early.

In terms of animals, of course they get cancer - not necessarily due to stress but to natural mutations that have happened to the human race in the past too. If we compare cancer rates of animals to those of humans they are significantly lower especially for wild animals, however our pets are catching up to us due the chemical induced food, etc.

All in all cancer is uncontrolled cell growth and we have millions if not more of mutated cells in our body each day. However in a healthy person those cells get readily destroyed.

The trick to avoiding cancer is to minimize exposure to mutagens while at the same time staying optimally healthy (good diet, exercise, low stress, no smoking, drinking,etc..) so that your body can deal with any problems early.

[Dannyboy1]

Originally Posted by Elixir

How cancer is caused is a huge misconception by many people...if you don't have the gene for skin cancer, then you will never get skin cancer on matter how many hours you bake yourself in the sun. That's why some people smoke all their life and never get lung cancer, whereas someone who never smokes might get it...we all have these cancer genes and they won't turn on unless an environmental factor triggers it. The thing is, we don't have the technology to know which cancer genes we have..so just try to be careful in all aspects.

It's not proven to be completely true. It can't be proven when we can't even tell what cancer genes we have. It is proven that some people with multiple personalities can change their eye color with a different personality, so I don't believe you can say the mind can't create cancer. You don't know that for sure. Theories are almost always proven to not be completely true if given enough time due to advancements in technology.

[Dannyboy1]

Originally Posted by DarKnight

Sounds like a lot of BS to me. Its true that the mental state influences your health, but I don't really see how it can generate an abnormal celular development.

The mind can do more than you realize. It can change your eye color (cases of multiple personalities). If someone is depressed for years it can literally change their body completely. The mind controls all bodily functions. It can certainly create cancer.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by 24evita

To answer the original question can cancer be caused by stress/worry - the answer is 100% YES!

Many people believe that stress can cause cancer, particularly breast cancer. But the evidence for this has been poor. Stressful events can alter the levels of hormones in the body and affect the immune system. But there is no evidence that these changes could lead to cancer.

Most scientific studies have found that stress does not increase the risk of cancer. One study had even found that high stress levels can actually reduce the risk of breast cancer, by lowering oestrogen levels. And even in the event that stress and cancer are linked, the effects would be very small compared to other factors such as lifestyle, age or family history.

Problems with earlier studies

The studies that have linked stress and cancer have had flawed designs, including very small numbers of participants. Often, people with cancer were asked to recall if they were stressed before they developed their disease. But these people are likely to overestimate their past problems to try and explain their condition, or because cancer itself is very stressful.

Stress is also difficult to define and people can have different views on what they would consider to be stressful. And many studies looked at stress out of context. They ignored things that would affect how someone deals with stress like support from friends and family.

Studies which have specifically tried to address these issues have concluded that stress is not linked to cancer.

(Extract from Cancer Research UK : Stress and cancer)

[Dannyboy1]

Originally Posted by Cantando

Many people believe that stress can cause cancer, particularly breast cancer. But the evidence for this has been poor. Stressful events can alter the levels of hormones in the body and affect the immune system. But there is no evidence that these changes could lead to cancer.

Most scientific studies have found that stress does not increase the risk of cancer. One study had even found that high stress levels can actually reduce the risk of breast cancer, by lowering oestrogen levels. And even in the event that stress and cancer are linked, the effects would be very small compared to other factors such as lifestyle, age or family history.

Problems with earlier studies

The studies that have linked stress and cancer have had flawed designs, including very small numbers of participants. Often, people with cancer were asked to recall if they were stressed before they developed their disease. But these people are likely to overestimate their past problems to try and explain their condition, or because cancer itself is very stressful.

Stress is also difficult to define and people can have different views on what they would consider to be stressful. And many studies looked at stress out of context. They ignored things that would affect how someone deals with stress like support from friends and family.

Studies which have specifically tried to address these issues have concluded that stress is not linked to cancer.

(Extract from Cancer Research UK : Stress and cancer)

Doesn't mean it's not there. There was no proof the world was round until someone sailed far enough. There was no proof cigarettes caused cancer until enough studies were done. What about placebos that miraculously cure people of things? There may not be proof yet. That doesn't mean it's not true.

[24evita]

Originally Posted by Dannyboy1

It's not proven to be completely true. It can't be proven when we can't even tell what cancer genes we have. It is proven that some people with multiple personalities can change their eye color with a different personality, so I don't believe you can say the mind can't create cancer. You don't know that for sure. Theories are almost always proven to not be completely true if given enough time due to advancements in technology.

Well with the human genome project complete, scientists do have the database for each of our genes. Yes a lot of the material still needs to be decoded but we are well on our way with that.

However if we are talking about what the mind is capable of then I totally agree. I know there are many, many people out there who do not know, understand or want to believe in the power of our mind, our thoughts and emotions - but quantum physics and wisdom from all over the world is surfacing on these topics more and more. It is not a surprise for example that hypochondriacs do actually make themselves sick and tumors and cancers can be eliminated over night. Many of us do not realize really how powerful we are when it comes to our minds.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by Dannyboy1

That doesn't mean it's not true.

Neither does it mean that it is true, which is what the poster implied.
What may be stressful for you may not be stressful for me.
I think most of us know that keeping down stress levels is desirable for our health. High stress levels may precipitate the onset of some conditions, such as high blood pressure, but to state that stress can actually cause cancer, without any evidence, is taking it a bit too far (IMO).

Believing something is true does not make it true.

[Dannyboy1]

Originally Posted by Cantando

Neither does it mean that it is true, which is what the poster implied.
What may be stressful for you may not be stressful for me.
I think most of us know that keeping down stress levels is desirable for our health. High stress levels may precipitate the onset of some conditions, such as high blood pressure, but to state that stress can actually cause cancer, without any evidence, is taking it a bit too far (IMO).

Believing something is true does not make it true.

Neither has concrete evidence. You obviously think it's untrue and I'm just pointing out that you cannot be certain. It's an opinion, nothing more.

[24evita]

Originally Posted by Cantando

Most scientific studies have found that stress does not increase the risk of cancer. One study had even found that high stress levels can actually reduce the risk of breast cancer, by lowering oestrogen levels. And even in the event that stress and cancer are linked, the effects would be very small compared to other factors such as lifestyle, age or family history.

Problems with earlier studies

The studies that have linked stress and cancer have had flawed designs, including very small numbers of participants. Often, people with cancer were asked to recall if they were stressed before they developed their disease. But these people are likely to overestimate their past problems to try and explain their condition, or because cancer itself is very stressful.

Stress is also difficult to define and people can have different views on what they would consider to be stressful. And many studies looked at stress out of context. They ignored things that would affect how someone deals with stress like support from friends and family.

Studies which have specifically tried to address these issues have concluded that stress is not linked to cancer.

I agree with you with regards to the studies - however there are many things that studies cannot measure - one is exactly what you say about what one person finds stressful another one doesn't perhaps and it really all boils down to how each person handles stress.

However I hope that no one can argue that when a body is under stress (whatever that stress may be) conscious or subconscious - it does not function optimally and whether that translates into a flu for some or cancer for others depends on many factors.

So to restate my point, I do not want people to think that if you stress you automatically get cancer - but I still believe you have a higher chance of cancer.

And one more thing with respect to stress - I hope we all understand here that it has a very broad definition - there is the evolutionary fight/flight response kind of stress and there is the "not enough sleep and nutrition stress", the angry personality stress as well as many others. I think the reasons for the great debates are just that we are only now starting to understand and discover how our bodies react to various stressors and in various situations and what power our mind has in all this.

There are just so many factors that come into play and to consider that it is probably one of the most complex health issues right now so naturally many opinions surface.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by Dannyboy1

Neither has concrete evidence. You obviously think it's untrue and I'm just pointing out that you cannot be certain. It's an opinion, nothing more.

I didn't think it was untrue as I was reading the post. I had an open mind.

I Googled the subject and highlighted the current, available evidence that indicated that stress was not a cause of cancer. I was unable to find any evidence that indicated it was a cause.

How did you want me to respond? Did you want me to believe it outright and say, "Well, this poster has said it, so it must be true!"?

If someone else posts, saying that soup can cause cancer, should I believe that?
Hmm, well, I'm not certain, perhaps it can. Watch this space!

[Calimero]

What fascinates me is that I once read an article somewhere that cancer cells are familiar to embryo cells the way they are able to move through the body.

So if you are speaking about the mind....
Has an embryo a mind? If so what does an embryo think? So that all these cells become a body in stead of just being a tumor?
If in early stage there is a miscarriage and so the embryo stops living are it the wrong thoughts of the embryo that reduced the embryo to become a tumor that would never be able to live independent from the body of the mother and so a miscarriage occurs to avoid that the cells would spread into the body of the mother and make the mother to have cancer?

Just some questions and thoughts. I surely don't have a clear vision on cancer at all and how important the mind is in that matter.

[24evita]

Originally Posted by Calimero

What fascinates me is that I once read an article somewhere that cancer cells are familiar to embryo cells the way they are able to move through the body.

So if you are speaking about the mind....
Has an embryo a mind? If so what does an embryo think? So that all these cells become a body in stead of just being a tumor?
If in early stage there is a miscarriage and so the embryo stops living are it the wrong thoughts of the embryo that reduced the embryo to become a tumor that would never be able to live independent from the body of the mother and so a miscarriage occurs to avoid that the cells would spread into the body of the mother and make the mother to have cancer?

Just some questions and thoughts. I surely don't have a clear vision on cancer at all and how important the mind is in that matter.

What fascinating questions!!!!

Hmmm, well for starters I am not sure what the gist was of the article you read in comparing cancer cells to embryonic cells? As a biologist I have never encountered that and the only thing I am thinking is that this somehow is linked to stem cells. In which case embryo cells are able to divide in ways sometimes compared to cancer cells - but in no way does it have anything to do with the mother getting cancer.

Now in terms of your questions...my belief is that yes, an embryo has a mind, not the kind of mind you or I have but a mind that can be better described by the word "consciousness". I believe based on research in quantum physics that every single one of our cells has its own consciousness and is thus capable of great things on its own, but even greater when it works with others as a unit.

In terms of miscarriages - when cells do not divide properly and the next logical sequence of the embryo cannot be performed and hence "nature" or the organism knows it won't survive, a miscarriage happens. I know many women take this very hard, but in most cases it is a blessing in disguise as that being would have most likely not survived past birth or have been greatly handicapped - both mentally and physically.

As far as the embryo having the "wrong thoughts" I do not think that an embryo is capable of such neither is a baby until it is conditioned by our Earthly ways.

But to avoid getting off topic, I think however that the above require a greater debate and reflection perhaps in another discussion topic?

Cheers

[Brutha]

However I hope that no one can argue that when a body is under stress (whatever that stress may be) conscious or subconscious - it does not function optimally

If the body doesn't function optimally that might also result in slower cell growth with could reduce cancer.
Without having good research you can't say for sure what happens.

[24evita]

Originally Posted by Brutha

If the body doesn't function optimally that might also result in slower cell growth with could reduce cancer.
Without having good research you can't say for sure what happens.

I am not sure why you assume that I do not have good research unless you want me to start quoting material.

The body not functioning optimally translates into a 1001 different reactions that could be happening and which should not be, under optimal conditions.

In the case of cancer cells, as you say that they could result in slower cell growth and thus the reduction of cancer, the chances are possible, but extremely unlikely. The first thing to go will be your most used cells, like skin and intestine, and thus the first signs of stress are poor and slow wound healing as well as poor and disrupted digestion.