Peart, glioblastoma, and headphones

[PhonoBrainer]

Preface: I have no research nor any bona fide information at all to support this wondering.

Having seen the godlike and taken-too-soon Mr. Peart in picture after picture wearing headphones, which are pretty much decent-sized magnets in proximity to the brain . . . and extrapolating a rock n roll lifetime's use of headphones. . . was wondering if those magnetic fields could extend into brain tissue and disrupt cell replication at a DNA level.

Crazy? Stupid? Does anyone have any facts or near facts to support or debunk this idea? I've always been in headphones myself and have often wondered about potential problems with brain cancer.

RIP Neal and thanks for all the escapes that helped to soothe the unattractive truth.

 

[David Sprouse]

I thought Neal was good looking .....

[Wibbles]

It's not headphones you need to be worrying about. I have it on good authority that wind turbines are the problem. The pumpkin wouldn't lie.

[DeeringAmps]

I'm assuming, we all know what that does, that yours is a serious question (this is the Coffee House though).
From the Mayo website:
More-common forms of radiation, such as electromagnetic fields from power lines and radio frequency radiation
from microwave ovens have not been shown to increase the risk of glioma.
The drivers in headphones would qualify as creating an "electromagnetic field".
So, are they a risk?
Given my complexion, I'm more worried about UV rays; one of the "benefits" of being Dutch/Irish, transparent skin...

Tom

[PhonoBrainer]

16 minutes ago, DeeringAmps said:

I'm assuming, we all know what that does, that yours is a serious question (this is the Coffee House though).
From the Mayo website:
More-common forms of radiation, such as electromagnetic fields from power lines and radio frequency radiation
from microwave ovens have not been shown to increase the risk of glioma.
The drivers in headphones would qualify as creating an "electromagnetic field".
So, are they a risk?
Given my complexion, I'm more worried about UV rays; one of the "benefits" of being Dutch/Irish, transparent skin...

Tom

True, and yes, a serious wondering.

Of course the effect of magnetic fields might vary due to 1. Length of time of exposure, and 2, proximity.

Or not at all.

 

Thanks for the research, nice to know that. I hope the Mayo research . . . holds.

[PhonoBrainer]

3 hours ago, Wibbles said:

It's not headphones you need to be worrying about. I have it on good authority that wind turbines are the problem. The pumpkin wouldn't lie.

Ah, the feared windmills of your mind.

[craigb]

Having been a part owner in an Alternative Energy startup who's PhD work is in the brain/mind area, I've seen quite a bit of information regarding EMF's ranging from informative to probably hysterical hype.  The jury's still somewhat out on this subject.

The main issue is this:  The brain is a very electrical device that was never meant to be subjected to "unnatural" vibrations like the frequencies coming from power lines, cell phones, WiFi, etc.

The next problem is the vast amounts of misinformation or downright subliminal brainwashing from all forms of media.  The accuracy of main-stream reporting is FAR less than the mass public would ever believe (and reality is much, much weirder than you think).  The biggest threat to mankind as a whole comes from a select few who have promoted money and power over caring for other humans that share the planet.  Much of this is buried and you have to spend months down some pretty dark rabbit holes to truly discover the scope of what's going on.  After losing houses, vehicles and about a million dollars back in the so-called "Credit Crunch" of 2008-9, I did just this (including three solid months then and more since).  What I found makes most conspiracy theories look tame, so I'm not going to expound on that topic here.  Plus, now that Net Neutrality has been overturned, a lot of companies (like Google) have started openly censoring the internet "in favor of more reputable sources like mass media and Wikipedia" - yes, they actually said that.  That said, the parts that apply here are these:

• Cancer is far more understood than you'll ever hear.  It comes from when a cell loses 40% of its oxygen (a doctor won the Nobel Prize back in the 30's for this discovery) - Although banned in the U.S., a few of the highest ranking people in the FDA have been documented going to West Germany for oxygen therapy when they contracted cancer
• There are safer ways to produce power, but they don't make enough money (as J. P. Morgan once said "If I can't put a meter on it, I don't want it!")
• There are actually some experimental ways to use magnets around the brain that are beneficial
• The FDA will not approve anything that will prevent or cure - they will only approve treatments (and are funded by those who benefit most from this)
• The FCC is run by a guy who was a lawyer for Verizon
• The country that came up with 5G (Israel) won't even allow it in their country - too dangerous.

The bottom line is this: All of those who are supposed to be looking out for YOU are not; if a benefit doesn't make someone a profit, it will be suppressed.  The new types of communication (e.g., 5G) utilize microwaves (the frequency term) for example.  It was a radar communications engineer who discovered that these waves can cook things back in the 40's, however the devices we use to cook are shielded.  Would you have an unshielded microwave oven running in your bedroom?  Ironically, many people do!  Sure, they're at lower power, but all Blue Tooth devices, WiFi's, cell phones use frequencies that are unnatural to our brains.

So, I seriously doubt that Neal's use of headphones had anything to do with his brain cancer.  However, there are so many suspects that it would be hard to narrow the true cause down.

Feel free to start your own investigations.

Here's one guy who survived who has started his own campaign to get people aware of the dangers: Lloyd Burrell

 

[Wibbles]

One certainly shouldn't be taking medical advice from the mass media. They aren't interested in the accuracy of what they are reporting, only in the headline.

For example, there may be a report saying that, according to a new study, drinking a glass of red wine a day helps prevent diabetes. What they don't say is there have been another 999 studies saying that drinking red wine has no effect on diabetes. Nor do they care about whether the study has been peer reviewed or whether the results are repeatable - without this no reliance can be placed on the study.

One horrific result is we now have hundreds of people in developed countries dying from easily treatable diseases, e.g. measles. Thanks Andrew Wakefield. 

As for the media (and politicians) misinterpreting the results of medical studies  whether through ignorance or design ...

 

 

 

 

 

Yikes! I've gone over my three sentence limit, I think I need a lie down.

 

 

 

[S.L.I.P.]

14 hours ago, Wibbles said:

wind turbines are the problem

[PhonoBrainer]

10 hours ago, craigb said:

 

• Cancer is far more understood than you'll ever hear.  It comes from when a cell loses 40% of its oxygen (a doctor won the Nobel Prize back in the 30's for this discovery) - Although banned in the U.S., a few of the highest ranking people in the FDA have been documented going to West Germany for oxygen therapy when they contracted cancer

 

That's an awesome response so thank you! You cover and connect cancer to all sorts of topics.

I'd like to ask about oxygen therapy. Is that targeted?

As I understand it, cancer cells in tumors use more glucose and more oxygen, so I wonder how more oxygen wouldn't just feed all cells, including the cancer?

You may not know and this isn't Cancer Corner.com so just wondering. Thanks for your deep thoughts.

[Starise]

Cancer seems to happen with cells that begin to replicate into cancer because they somehow lose their DNA instructions. If cells don't get the right amount of oxygen,aren't fed correctly and never rest they can go awry. The body defends against it to some degree until it gets out of hand. There are lots of factors that can contribute to this. RF is one possibility. The main difference between a few magnets around a person's head and something like 5K Wifi is the Wifi is generating  a more powerful signal through the air at higher frequencies. I once carried a cell phone in my pocket all day. My leg tingled in that place even when I removed the phone. So did my ear when I used it for a long time.The jury is indeed out on most of it because any admission would mean law suits out the wazoo. A "little" RF is like a "little" sugar. You don't pay much attention to it until you consume so much of it that is begins to mess with your cell function. For RF distance is the main thing. Don't carry a phone in your pocket all day, keep it about 2 ft minimum from your body. Use a speaker phone whenever possible. When I worked with two way radio I still remember being burned because I was holding a police car antennae when someone transmitted. Imagine what a radio station antennae could do.

Sitting next to a wifi transmitter at close range is probably a no no, but I'm doing it right now. Bluetooth is a fairly weak signal in comparison to smart phones and computer wifi. I personally think it would take a LOT of up close exposure for a long time for it to make any huge difference.

There is a long list of things that can cause cancer and there are so many different kinds of cancer that it would be difficult to specifically say what might have caused Neal Pearts cancer.

Here are just a few-

Genetic disposition, weakened immune system, Ingesting large amounts of sugar. There is something to making sure the cells have enough oxygen. I wear a c-pap for that reason.Many people don't realize how much sugar is in a glass of soda. Carcinogens of any kind. Not drinking enough water.Chemicals in your food from pesticides, Exposure to radioactivity.... too much exposure to the sun . Radon dust, close proximity to nuclear waste of any kind. We don't always know this. It could blow over you as a cloud or be in the water and unless you happen to have a detector with you you won't know. It's invisible.  Nuclear power plants don't always inform the public when there is a minor mishap. Sometimes it's a combination of these things. Neal was in his 60's . Things just begin to slow down . Something is eventually going to get everyone. All we can do is to be careful about what we eat, try to stay away from anything that has the potential to cause harm....maybe prolong the inevitable.

[Wibbles]

Just living a healthy lifestyle will make it seem so very, very looooong.

[Starise]

Yes always smoke vegetarian cigarettes.

[craigb]

14 hours ago, emeraldsoul said:

That's an awesome response so thank you! You cover and connect cancer to all sorts of topics.

I'd like to ask about oxygen therapy. Is that targeted?

As I understand it, cancer cells in tumors use more glucose and more oxygen, so I wonder how more oxygen wouldn't just feed all cells, including the cancer?

You may not know and this isn't Cancer Corner.com so just wondering. Thanks for your deep thoughts.

The part highlighted in red above is where the problems start.  Cells, just like most other living things, will try anything to stay alive.  When they are deprived of enough oxygen, they begin to use substitutes with glucose being the most accessible.  

Although I'm NOT certain of the actual process (I'm neither an oncologist nor have I studied this area to the depths I've researched other things), but it's once it reaches the 40% tipping point that the cell begins to mutate.  As Starise alluded to, there are usually other factors involved and, actually, this is one of the main reasons targeted, human-created treatments have issues: The body works synergistically, not as a bunch of separate functions.

Oxygen therapy is similar to the barometric treatment you get if you have the "Bends" (air-bubbles in your blood supply from surfacing too quick while deep-sea diving).  The goal being to enrich the oxygen levels of the cells so they don't need to rely on sugars.

Currently, the so-called "treatments" for cancer are the equivalent of setting your house on fire to get rid of termites.  There are two main reasons for all the celebration among cancer survivors: The first is the most obvious, to acknowledge those who have fought and won, but the second is to subtly imply that the treatments are effective so people will continue to use them.  What they DON'T want the public to realize is that nearly 98% of those that take chemotherapy do not survive!  (Here's one report: According to a 2004 report by Morgan, Ward, and Barton: "The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies. ... survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA." See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15630849, or https://www.burtongoldberg.com/home/burtongoldberg/contribution-of-chemotherapy-to-five-year-survival-rate-morgan.pdf)

Studies have also discovered that at least 80% of oncologists won't take chemotherapy for themselves should they contract cancer.

So, like the picture of the Centenarian smoking above, there's always going to be a few exceptions to the rule, however, if you only publicize the exceptions, the general masses (that typically do zero research) tend to assume that the exceptions are actually the norm.  This is why, whenever you turn on just about any mainstream media currently, the news is almost always horrible.  The reason is almost always a political agenda (I won't go down this path here, but it should be pretty obvious that governments like to create problems that they can solve by taxing and removing freedoms - money, power and control of the masses - same as it's been for millennia).  One example was after marijuana was legalized in Oregon (2015).  A news report trumpeted the 16 traffic fatalities caused by marijuana and driving!!!  What they intentionally leave out is the fact that there were 13 traffic fatalities a few years earlier (2004) that involved marijuana - and this was before it became legal.  What they also leave out is how that number compares to all traffic fatalities.  For example, in 2016, there were 495 traffic fatalities in Oregon.  One look at all the statistics and you could conclude that having only THREE additional deaths that involved (the now legalized) marijuana isn't really all that bad, and, how do we know that any of those wouldn't have occurred anyway if marijuana wasn't present?  Needless to say, that's not the message those that control the media wanted to send!

----------------------------------------------------

As a side-note on the original topic, the mind and body are incredible things!  I've not only witnessed, but have had personal proof, that so-called "impossible" (per the mainstream medical society) things can occur.  Intent is HUGE!!!  My Mom flatly stated that she would beat her cancer and she was only one of two survivors for the type of ovarian cancer that she had (the survival rate was only 0.03%!!!).  She's going on 91 in May and has been cancer-free for 22 years now.  However, the bulk of her current health issues stem from the chemo treatments she had to take back then.  The other main component (which applies to many areas of life) is KNOWING.  This goes beyond belief.  No, I'm not talking about Scientology or anything like that but, what I've found is that too many people feel that there's only one way to do things.  I've realized that almost all of the different areas have something to offer, albeit sometimes buried in nonsense.  There's a lot of good in both Eastern and Western medical philosophies, you just need to weed out the parts that are either added for "mystical/magical effect" or for profit (i.e., most of the prescription medication in Western medicine which, by the way, the physicians usually only learn about from pharmaceutical reps!).    Remember:  Your physician is NOT trained in the medicines they prescribe, pharmacists are.

[craigb]

tl; dr

Studies have shown that people who have more birthdays tend to live longer. ?

[David Sprouse]

54 minutes ago, craigb said:

The part highlighted in red above is where the problems start.  Cells, just like most other living things, will try anything to stay alive.  When they are deprived of enough oxygen, they begin to use substitutes with glucose being the most accessible.  

Although I'm NOT certain of the actual process (I'm neither an oncologist nor have I studied this area to the depths I've researched other things), but it's once it reaches the 40% tipping point that the cell begins to mutate.  As Starise alluded to, there are usually other factors involved and, actually, this is one of the main reasons targeted, human-created treatments have issues: The body works synergistically, not as a bunch of separate functions.

Oxygen therapy is similar to the barometric treatment you get if you have the "Bends" (air-bubbles in your blood supply from surfacing too quick while deep-sea diving).  The goal being to enrich the oxygen levels of the cells so they don't need to rely on sugars.

Currently, the so-called "treatments" for cancer are the equivalent of setting your house on fire to get rid of termites.  There are two main reasons for all the celebration among cancer survivors: The first is the most obvious, to acknowledge those who have fought and won, but the second is to subtly imply that the treatments are effective so people will continue to use them.  What they DON'T want the public to realize is that nearly 98% of those that take chemotherapy do not survive!  (Here's one report: According to a 2004 report by Morgan, Ward, and Barton: "The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies. ... survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA." See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15630849, or https://www.burtongoldberg.com/home/burtongoldberg/contribution-of-chemotherapy-to-five-year-survival-rate-morgan.pdf)

Studies have also discovered that at least 80% of oncologists won't take chemotherapy for themselves should they contract cancer.

So, like the picture of the Centenarian smoking above, there's always going to be a few exceptions to the rule, however, if you only publicize the exceptions, the general masses (that typically do zero research) tend to assume that the exceptions are actually the norm.  This is why, whenever you turn on just about any mainstream media currently, the news is almost always horrible.  The reason is almost always a political agenda (I won't go down this path here, but it should be pretty obvious that governments like to create problems that they can solve by taxing and removing freedoms - money, power and control of the masses - same as it's been for millennia).  One example was after marijuana was legalized in Oregon (2015).  A news report trumpeted the 16 traffic fatalities caused by marijuana and driving!!!  What they intentionally leave out is the fact that there were 13 traffic fatalities a few years earlier (2004) that involved marijuana - and this was before it became legal.  What they also leave out is how that number compares to all traffic fatalities.  For example, in 2016, there were 495 traffic fatalities in Oregon.  One look at all the statistics and you could conclude that having only THREE additional deaths that involved (the now legalized) marijuana isn't really all that bad, and, how do we know that any of those wouldn't have occurred anyway if marijuana wasn't present?  Needless to say, that's not the message those that control the media wanted to send!

----------------------------------------------------

As a side-note on the original topic, the mind and body are incredible things!  I've not only witnessed, but have had personal proof, that so-called "impossible" (per the mainstream medical society) things can occur.  Intent is HUGE!!!  My Mom flatly stated that she would beat her cancer and she was only one of two survivors for the type of ovarian cancer that she had (the survival rate was only 0.03%!!!).  She's going on 91 in May and has been cancer-free for 22 years now.  However, the bulk of her current health issues stem from the chemo treatments she had to take back then.  The other main component (which applies to many areas of life) is KNOWING.  This goes beyond belief.  No, I'm not talking about Scientology or anything like that but, what I've found is that too many people feel that there's only one way to do things.  I've realized that almost all of the different areas have something to offer, albeit sometimes buried in nonsense.  There's a lot of good in both Eastern and Western medical philosophies, you just need to weed out the parts that are either added for "mystical/magical effect" or for profit (i.e., most of the prescription medication in Western medicine which, by the way, the physicians usually only learn about from pharmaceutical reps!).    Remember:  Your physician is NOT trained in the medicines they prescribe, pharmacists are.

Craig,  what's going on with crispr research for cancer?

[craigb]

1 hour ago, David Sprouse said:

Craig,  what's going on with crispr research for cancer?

 

This was aired last month and is very interesting (I watched because the second segment was the use of psilocybin in a clinical setting, an area I've been studying).  The progress is headed by the same guy that led the team in decoding the human genome.  It's NOT a fast and easy solution (very painful), but it IS effective for what it currently targets.  I seem to recall that they said they've found "solutions" for over 500 DNA issues, but need to create therapeutic strategies for each still.

That said, these obviously target incorrect genetic code issues which most cancers do not fall under.  In addition to oxygen therapy (mentioned previously), I'm very curious about the use of natural supplements to combat cancer (all in addition to reducing sugar intake, increasing hydration and high-intensity interval training, HIIT, to improve blood-flow which naturally improves the delivery of oxygen to the body). 

Some that have shown promise are fucoidan (found in brown seaweed); the various parts of the Graviola tree (found in the Amazon); AHCC (activated hexose correlate compound - a hybridization of several kinds of medicinal mushrooms); lactoferrin; concentrated flax hull lignans; cesium chloride (typically combined with dimethyl sulfoxide, or DMSO); Agaricus Blazei Murill (ABM - a mushroom out of Brazil); Bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis); Meshima (an Asian mushroom); an extract from Broccoli; another extract from Green Tea; a modified citrus pectin (MCP); Diindolylmethane (DIM); Stinging Nettle; Chinese skullcap; Berberine; Pomegranate; Ganoderma lucidum (a.k.a., the Reishi mushroom); Pygeum bark; crinum latifolium (a Vietnamese herb); compounds in wheat germ
called DMBQ; and all the new stem-cell/T-Cell discoveries.

Actually, the new approaches to stem-cells and T-Cells (the cells that can become anything in your body, as you age you lose a lot, by 35 you've already lost around 55%!) are very interesting.  There's a new treatment that's expensive (over $100k) that requires needles and precise laboratory work but, I'm finding that this procedure can now be approached with a combination of supplements.  I'm trying one combination now and am already seeing results!

[Jesse Screed]

Scientists Discover Immune Cell That Kills Most Cancers

"Previously nobody believed this could be possible."

by Kristin Houser / January 21 2020

A newly discovered immune cell could lead to the creation of a universal cancer treatment —

a “Holy Grail” treatment that would work for all cancers, in all people.

https://futurism.com/neoscope/scientists-discover-immune-cell-kills-cancers

 

Unbelievable