Willim's Page 05

05 John R Lee MD - Dec 2002 Talk

The transcript of December, 2002 ...

This talk was given by John Roland Lee when he was 73. He was born 27-Nov-1929 and died 17-Oct-2003

In the transcription that follows x#mm:ss where x is CD 1 or 2, mm minutes and ss seconds.
The CD's from which this was transcribed are entitled "John R. Lee M.D Talks About Hormones and Breast Cancer"
Now the transcript ..

John R Lee - December, 2002 Mill Valley, California, United States

My career in medicine started out in fairly conventionally and I was quite a conventional doctor for about 20 years in Mill Valley and the experience that got me off this path and on to a different path occurred in 1978.

I had started attending alternative medical meetings. It took me about 12 to 15 years to realise that doctors in medical school learn as much as they can, but that the practice of medicine is much broader and more complicated than we are led to believe and also a lot of the things we are taught in medical school turn out to be wrong. 1#00:44

In fact when I go back for class reunions the dean of the University Minnesota Medical School there is always a new dean. Deans don't last very long and so every 10 years there is always a new dean, but they always have the same joke and the joke is that things are changing so rapidly in medicine now due to new discoveries that we have to change what we teach. And in fact the half life of knowledge taught at medical school these days is about 5 to 7 years, which means in every 5 to 7 years half of what was taught turns out to be wrong in some way or another and you have to make these changes. The joke is that they don't know which half. If you hang around long enough what was found to be true once and is then thrown out for a while and then it comes back and is true again. 1#01:36

Chocolate, it is back in favour again, it has got a lot of good Magnesium and it is an antidepressant and it doesn't hurt anybody. ... all these sort of things. Fat is now good, you just have to know which is the good fat and which is the bad fat. And all sorts of things change all of the time. So I discovered that there are lots of things I didn't know. And I found that at some of these alternative meetings there were brilliant people there from whom I could learn things from.

I learned a lot about nutrition for instance from the alternative meetings I attended, not from medical school. At any rate in 1978 I heard this talk by Ray Peat a PhD Bio-Chemist, one of these young geniuses. His PhD thesis had been on the multiple roles of progesterone and he gave his talk and challenged the doctors there. There were about 400 doctors there and he challenged the doctors by saying "why is it that when doctors remove ovaries from some woman and they know that the ovaries generally make several oestrogens, testosterone, progesterone and they remove these organs. Why is it they only give one back? Why do they only give a little oestrogen back?” 1#02:53

And I thought, "That's a good question? Why do we do that?" Some woman goes through menopause and the doctor says you are not making any oestrogen take some. What about the other hormones, the other hormones that are balanced in your body all the time that you had them? The testosterone, the progesterone and all their effects they all work together like a team. Why do we only give one back? So I got hold of Ray Peat after his talk.

It was a fun meeting. I had been invited to give a talk on sugar, hypoglycaemia and Linus Pauling was there to give a talk on ortho-molecular medicine. So this was kind of fun in those days to have all this fermentation of all this new stuff to learn and see the application and to make sense out of it.

But I got hold of Ray Peat and he gave me all his references. He had about 96 references, like Martin Luther with his 90 thesis. At any rate each reference, each paper had 20 or 30 more references and I with the help of the librarian at Marin General ospital I tracked down all these references. And I was learning things about progesterone that I had never learned in medical school. I thought that I must have slept through a lass because they didn't teach me all of this, all of the wonderful things progesterone does and how important it is in the body. 1#04:15

And then I began talking to my colleagues and I discovered that we had all slept through the same class. Nobody knew about the real hormone. All knew about the synthetic hormones, the things that are in the birth control pills, and the things we give women at menopause. Those aren't the real hormones The are synthetic versions, they are not the same molecule. And I began to get a glimmer of understanding that a big scam had been perpetrated on American women.

And in other parts of the world women go through menopause they don't bother to see a doctor for that is a normal change of life. And in other parts of the world women don't get breast cancer like we do here in the US. But they are telling people in the US that menopause is a disease. It is a condition where you are deficient in oestrogen. 1#05:07

Now that is the first thing I looked up in the library and looked up studies, they compare the oestrogen levels 5 years before and 5 years after menopause and discovered that estrone one of the major oestrogens only declines about 40%. Estrodiol declines about 60%. But you are still making plenty of oestrogen. In fact recent studies up until the last year have shown that women up until the age 80 65% still make plenty of oestrogen.

They got away with this scam by convincing the doctors that menopause is a disease of oestrogen deficiency and that all women need oestrogen. Imagine the marketing potential here. All women as they arrive at menopause are put on a drug. They are supposed to take that drug till they die. What a marketing victory that is if they could convince people of that. 1#06:01

And you wonder, “How did they convince the doctors of that?” Because there is nothing in the medical literature that says that is. It is a normal change of life and it is like going through puberty. You don't have to go to a doctor about that, and going through the menopause you don't have to go to a doctor about that.

So I wondered why as doctors we tended to believe these advertisements and then I realised that another major machine, a major method of conditioning doctors minds is called continuing Medical Education, CME, credits. You have to go to those meetings where you get credits. You have to accumulate 50 hours of credits every 3 years or you lose your license. Did you know that? Yes doctors have to do that and so there is lots of meetings to go to, only some of them do you have official credits. 1#06:59

So I was editor of Marin County Medical Bulletin at the time. I was the editor longer than anybody else in Marin County. In fact they don't have it any more. Doctors don't even pretend that they belong to an organisation that is independent and intelligent. They have dropped all that they just take their orders from the pharmaceutical companies.

But anyway I looked up, I called the state of Sacramento to find out who gives the credits "Which seminar gets the credits so that you can continue to hold your license?"

So they say "We let the AMA do that." Now isn't that odd, that's like setting a speed limit and then letting the boy scouts do the work. You know it's not, it doesn't make any sense but they said "we let the AMA do that."

They are the ones who determine, they tell us which meetings, which have credits that count. 1#08:00

So I called the AMA in Chicago, Illinois and I said "Is it true that you are the guys that determine who gets the credits?"

They said, "Yes."

I said "How do you do that?"

And they said "Well we have a committee."

And I said "Could you give the names of the people on the committee?" So they did and none of them are doctors, they are all from the pharmaceutical companies. Whoa! all of a sudden things began to fall into place. 1#08:28

I'm going to start by reviewing the year 2000 from the AMA journal studies. As you know for the last 30 to 40 years the standard practice has been to give HRT. I call it conventional HRT, because HRT just means Hormone Replacement Therapy. It is kind of generic, could be talking about insulin, could be talking about thyroid, could be talking about anything hormone replacement therapy.

But conventional HRT means that the doctor's going to be giving you a powerful oestrogen, probably Premarin that the get from pregnant mares urine and synthetic progestin called Provera. That's 99% of what doctors give. And you are told that you need this because you are deficient, that some how women are damaged goods. Mother Nature had a problem and somehow you came out flawed. And you need to have doctors to help you with your ormones when you are 45 years old. That is total nonsense of course, but they got that across. 1#09:37

And even if you got side effects from them like gaining weight or swollen breasts, fibrocystic breast, headaches are a very common one, if you give oestrogen that way. You are told that you need it to prevent heart attacks you need it to prevent strokes, you need it to prevent aging, you need it to prevent Alzheimer’s. And they keep coming out with these things that you need it for and people keep buying into this myth.

And here am I trying to track down how do they say these things. Where is the study that shows that taking oestrogen prevents a heart attack? It turns out there is no study. Where is the study that shows it prevents Alzheimer’s? There is no study that takes two equal groups and shows that oestrogen prevents Alzheimer’s. 1#10:26

Coffee and caffeine prevent Alzheimer’s, did you know that? The statistics show that if you load up with caffeine. I hope that everybody loaded up with caffeine today because we have 2 to 3 hours of intense study here and we want your brain cells to be working.

So I'm going to take you on a little tour through 2000. I mean, the year 2002 because in the year 2002, in the last year that we are in now in December. In this last year all the claims that conventional medicine has made about HRT have found to be false, all the claims of safety, not only the benefits don't happen, but it turns out that HRT is the main cause of breast cancer. So where is the mystery? 1#11:13

In heartland USA when people arrive at menopause less than 50% of the women even bother to talk about it. They certainly don't go to their doctors about it. They figure that it is just a time of life.

Of these that do go to their doctors in heartland USA some of them, not all of them but a good percentage are sent out of the office with a prescription for HRT. Less than 50% of those prescriptions are filled. The women say "Oh Maude down the road took this and she ballooned up and she got a stroke." 1#11:48

So women don't do it. 50% don't bother to fill the first prescription. Of the women who fill the first prescription only 15% are still taking the prescription 2 years later. These are facts. If we take 15% of 50% we have a pretty small number of people we are talking about 10 or 12% of people in heartland USA who continue to take HRT year after year after year. Guess what it is in Marin County? Well over 50% of the women are on HRT and they stick to it. The women here bought into the myth that HRT is safe and is good for you and you need it. And they are sticking to their HRT. They want to remain young, they want to remain sexy, they do probably eat pretty well and they probably get together in support group and all sorts of things like that. They may do some things that are good, but let me show you something. 1#12:55

This is the first study of 2002 in January reported in the AMA Journal. It is the Chen study from the University of Washington and is also called the Pugil Sound Study. It was a larger study. Through the records of the hospital of Washington University they found a whole bunch of women who had been there because of breast cancer. Then they found a whole bunch of women who had been through the hospital for other things and they matched them. They matched them for age and the number of kids they had and how long they had been married or where they lived and what sort of diet they had and whether they drank a lot or played bingo or whatever.

They found a matched group that hadn't had breast cancer. Then they asked them, "Tell me about your HRT? How many of you have been taking HRT?" And they took the ones, as you can see orange or yellowish ones, this is the breast cancer rate of the people who have been on HRT for 5 years. The green are the people with breast cancer who had never been on HRT. And the increase of breast cancer that occurs only from HRT is somewhere between 80 and 90%. 1#14:12

In fact this is just about double. This is the control, if their numbers are averaged out as 1 these numbers are all 1.6 or higher. So we can look at this and we can say HRT by itself as given by local doctors and the so called authorities almost doubles the risk of having breast cancer. 1#14:35

Now do the maths, if 5% of the population has HRT and 95% doesn't you'll get a certain number of breast cancers, but what if 50% of the people are on HRT? You are going to get a much higher number. Now in the newspapers and with the authorities that women are receiving they have not geography it is demography. You are in the demographic situation of having enough money and time to go to the doctor and get all these hormones and stick to it and you feel that you are doing the right thing because you are doing what your doctor said. 1#15:14

But look what is going to happen, they are going to have this high rate of breast cancer. I'm surprised that the rate isn't ten times higher than all across America. They are probably doing some things that are pretty good, they are probably on a pretty good diet. They probably have a good support group going. But the rate here is 2 or 3 times what it ought to be. And it is in other places here and there throughout the US. And it is always in the same situation. You have a high, well to do clientele and they stick to their HRT. That's it, the mystery is over we know what causes the extra cases of breast cancer. There are more of you following HRT and HRT causes the breast cancer, simple as that. There are other causes too but those are all balanced out this is the increase just due to HRT. So here we have the first crack out of the box in 2002. 1#16:15

{ Small arms 1000/month, hunger ? road traffic accidents? }

Now we have been writing a book about this for 2 years and it came out in January. It got published and we have 20 years of studies that we average out and look from the average we found before the Chen study, synthetic progestins like Provera when combined with oestrogens like Premarin increase breast cancer risks 1.4 to 2 fold. Same thing, some place between one and a half to a doubling the amount of breast cancer.

Do you know how many women in 2001 died of breast cancer in the US? 43000, 43000 women. You know how many people died in the terrorist attack September last year? 3000, if you had a terrorist attack every month for a whole damned year you would have 36000 people killed and we are talking 43000 people with breast cancer. And this year it is going to be 46000, it is climbing. The problem has been created here because you have been deliberately given wrong information. You have no way of understanding the problem unless you go and look and find what is really happening. Now how does this come about? It is because the plan that they have works so well. 1#17:51

You know the major profit making prescription drug is for the last 30 years? Oestrogen. They are making money on oestrogen, The company that makes Provera with the Premarin makes almost $3 billion a year. If you add up the other companies with their combinations we are talking $8 billion a year. They do not want to lose that market, they are willing to have the women die to keep up the bandwagon of buying HRT.

I'm not against HRT, I just want to define it differently. If some one is deficient in a hormone it is perfectly fine to find a way to try to restore that hormone because that hormone is needed. Who on the other hand would give insulin to somebody without know whether or not they needed it? They are giving oestrogen to women who are perfectly healthy and they are killing them to maintain this profitable scam. These are hard words but let me show you what the evidence is. So our book had arrived at the same thing that Chen had found. 1#19:06

Now I'm going to go through these. Probably can't read them, I'm going to read them to you. These are the things that showed up this year because of the Women's Health Initiative. You know about the Women's Health Initiative? They took your tax money multi millions of it and said "we are going to do some studies that need to be done."

# # # ... one set of figures

... The Women's Heath Initiative Trial, was abruptly cancelled in July 2002 when it showed a greater risk vs. benefit for a majority of it was thought to be preventing:

a 41% increase in strokes
a 29% increase in heart attacks
a 26% increase in breast cancer

a 22% increase in total CVD
a doubling of the rate of blood clots
a possible contributor to Alzheimer's disease

http://www.salivatest.com Salvate_oestrogen_dominance.pdf - I am struggling at the moment to give the exact path to this file in www.salivatest.com, in the meantime browse through the site

See also ... WHI Findings http://www.whi.org/findings/ht/eplusp_bc.php

Now the pharmaceutical company managed to get that changed and say "no we are not going to look at real hormones we are only going to look at synthetic hormones." So they started out that way and the whole experiment backfired on them because even using the best possible, healthiest women they still discovered the study had to be stopped because the women were dying and they couldn't do it. People had bought into the idea that oestrogen HRT maintains youthful femininity, prevents heart disease, benefits Alzheimers and ageing. 1#20:03

The new studies show that none of that is true. The first one was the Chen study, the next one in February Dr Cumming here at the University of California along with other medical institutions across the country discovered that, hey, if you selected out not the conventional estrodiol level, that oestrogen level because that has never been able to predict who is going to get breast cancer. They always claim that "look we can measure estrodiol level and they don't relate to who gets breast cancer". Well Dr Cumming found if you do the tests right and select out a type of hormone that floats around in your body called free estrodiol. It is not bound to a big protein, it is not in the process of being excreted. It is the active hormone, if you do that you can predict who is going to get breast cancer. Conventional serum tests of estrodiol level do not. The doctors have been kept in the dark on how to do the test. I have to tell you a little bit about how this happens. 1#21:02

When the ovary makes those hormones or the doctor gives you the Hormone it floats around in the bloodstream and when it passes through the liver the liver's job is to make a protein that binds to it that makes it water soluble so that it can be pee peed out in the urine. It is a very dynamic process. The length of time that the hormones last is very short, probably in the range of 5 or 10 minutes in your body and then it goes through the liver, gets protein bound. That makes it water soluble so it is in the serum and it goes through the the kidney washes out in the urine. This happens all the time, but that hormone should not be counted because it is no longer bio-available. 1#21:44

The real hormone has to be free, has to be un-encumbered by all this extra protein that has wrapped it up. So unless they know how to do that they have no way to know what the real hormone level is. So that is how they have pretended all these years that oestrogen doesn't make breast cancer. Because they used, they were looking in the wrong part of the blood they got the wrong numbers and it didn't matter. So Dr Cumming showed in February that if you find the right hormone you can predict who is going to get breast cancer. 1#22:15

In fact Dr Zava who is a co-author of our book, he has been doing saliva test for the last 30 years or 25 years, he has the largest databank of saliva test results in the world. And saliva test measure only the free hormone. The hormone that is bound to protein doesn't filter through the saliva glands into your saliva, only the real hormone does. 1#22:39

So when you do saliva tests you are looking at the concentration of the real hormone. And he told me, he has been so busy that he hasn't had time to write it up, but in his computer he selected out 3000 women who had breast cancer later on and he found that in all 3000 that they all had elevated estrodiol levels and low progesterone levels. 3000 out of 3000, can you imagine? So then he looked up 3000 women who didn't get breast cancer over the same period of time and they didn't have oestrogen dominance. When you don't have oestrogen dominance you don't get breast cancer, when you have oestrogen dominance you do get breast cancer. 1#23:12

So actually the people who funded this study want to sell a synthetic oestrogen that won't cause breast cancer. They say "Mother Nature made a mistake with your hormones and your hormones will cause breast cancer. So we have this synthetic drug that we want to sell and now we can pick out who should buy these drugs so they don't get it." The drug is a terrible drug

Then on the 3rd of July was a 6.8 year follow up on the Prempro Study. The Prempro study was, they were taking women who were menopausal and some of them got Premarin and Provera and others got placebo. And then they were just watching to see who gets heart attacks so they followed this along for 6.8 years and found that there was no heart benefit from Premarin and Provera. In fact the heart attacks were slightly higher in the woman taking the synthetic drugs. 1#24:08

So that was in July, one big calamity after another happened to conventional medicine. 17th July the Women's Health Initiative HRT study was stopped because of unacceptable incidence of breast cancer, strokes, gall bladder disease compared to the control. They had to stop the study too many women were dying.

And let me tell you about this study. This study was deliberately designed so women shouldn't die or get sick. They only used women who were healthy. They chose all those 8000 women who had no health problems whatsoever and three years later they were dying. They had to stop the study and by the way a similar study in England was stopped for the same reason. This was going on elsewhere, England has the same problem as we do and they had to stop the study. 1#24:59

What they didn't report in the study was over 45% of the women dropped out of the study because of the side effects of the oestrogen. Do you know what spin doctoring is? You take some test results and then you give it a spin. You try to make them tell you something other than what it really tells you.

The spin doctors say "Oh well if we are not going to give5 years of HRT we'll just give it 3 years or 2 years." However the study doctors who did the study they said "Oh no we've been keeping the track of the women who ropped out after a year or two and they are getting the breast cancers." There is no easy way out, the only interpretation is that the HRT being given by conventional medicine is wrong HRT. 1#25:46

They are doing something wrong here, women start out they make their hormones @ puberty, they make them very full women - breast and pubic hair and periods and they are strong and they are healthier than men. They can have babies and they are all in good health and everything is going great and then they get to be 45 years old. and hormones that have been good for all these years - that's part of what makes women so strong and so smart and intuitive and everything else is their hormone balance is great but when they get up in the late 30's and 40's their hormone balance begins to get off and so they go to the doctor. 1#26:21

They say "Hey, I've gained weight, my breasts are tender, I can't sleep on my stomach, I have headaches every time of the month my period comes and it is heavier and all that." He says, "Well ma'am you are approaching menopause, you need some oestrogen." They have plenty of oestrogen, they are still having periods. 1#26:37

What kind of doctor would then say you need oestrogen? I have to admit that I was that kind of doctor for about 12 -15 years. But after learning about the scam that was going on I became more and more educated. I have a garage full of references. I have 8-10 more three, 3, level file cases full of, I have thousands of references. No other doctor you have ever talked to has even seen that many references let alone read them. And doctors don't read the references any more. They only read the little summaries and in the summaries, if you can believe it, the summaries do not say what the study says. 1#27:24

A study was done on that and they found that only 5% of them does the summary say what the study really did. See that's all called spin doctoring. It occurs even before it shows up in the newspaper. And the newspapers don't care. The TV's, they only want news. They don't care if it is true or not. They just say, "Oh there is a doctor in Indianapolis who reports such and such ... that you are going to get such and such." They don't know what he is talking about and they don't care. They get it all made out, so that he can speak off and he can go off and play golf. 1#27:55

So look at this what happened, poor old general medicine on the 17th July here is another one in the same journal. Twenty years of oestrogen only therapy for people with hysterectomy increased ovarian cancer by 300%. You didn't even hear about that one and that was in the same journal.

Then the 28th August, another part of the Women's Health Initiative study, they found that C-reactive protein. C-reactive protein is a marker for general inflammation in your body. It is also the most important marker for who gets heart attacks. Cholesterol has no significance, zero. You could measure cholesterol on people and you cannot predict who is going to have a heart attack. But you measure C reactive protein and you can predict who is going to have the heart attack. It is an inflammatory disease, it is not a plumbing isease. It is not the blood flow through the coronary arteries per se or clots. It is the fact that inflammation there and that what causes it and CRP and guess what? HRT increases C-reactive protein an independent bio-marker for heart disease. 1#29:07

There is evidence right there that you don't want to overload people on oestrogen because it makes CRP go up. And the CRP going up is the sign that you are going to have a heart attack. Wow! 1#29:18

Then in September the Annals of Internal medicine in Canada they reported the largest, longest running test of mammograms on women. They used over 50000 women, our American study only used 5000 women or 8000. The Canadian study had 50000 women and they followed them for 16 years comparing the breast cancer deaths in the people who had mammograms and people who didn't. Guess what they found? No survival benefit, zero. 1#29:55

There is no question about this. This is the answer, finding these breast cancers six months or a year sooner changes nothing. It has taken 7-8 years for the cancer to grow to become the size it is to be found by mammograms. The next year you would find it with a lump. But the difference in the outcome is zero. Now that could mean one of two things. One is that you didn't find it soon enough. They still want to believe, “Gee if we find it soon enough and we remove the breast that'll do it.” Removing the breast does not treat the disease. All disease is due to an underlying metabolic disorder. Something in those cells is telling them, those cells to turn into cancer cells. 1#30:41

Cancer cells are normal cells that are changed. Something in the cell does that. That is the underlying metabolic imbalance and if you find the underlying metabolic imbalance and correct that, then you are treating the disease. Removing the breast tumour that developed because of the disease is not treating the disease. Do you all follow that? Yeah that ought to be clear. 1#31:05

Now the funny thing is doctors know this and they will tell the woman "Well now that you have had one breast cancer the odds are that much greater that you are going to have cancer in the other breast." Of course they are greater because he is leaving the disease unattended. So guess what the solution is?

We are going to give you a poison that blocks oestrogen receptors in the breast, Tamoxifen. Doesn't dawn on him that he could add just a little progesterone it is the balance in there that matters. It is not the oestrogen, it is the balance, the fact that oestrogen became dominant and progesterone has disappeared. He is not interested in that, he wants to give you a patented drug, a drug that he wants to make money. 1#31:45

They should take out the tumour and correct the underlying metabolic imbalance, they are not mutually incompatible. That is what you ought to do. Why leave the tumour there? So, yes I'm all for doing that. For me I'd have the tumour out, but I would hope that the doctor would be able to correct the underlying metabolic imbalance. Tamoxifen does not correct the underlying metabolic imbalance, it has never worked

Our Government and the FDA passed the regulation four years ago telling the makers of Tamoxifen they could not claim that it prevented cancer. So they cannot do that, but they can buy doctors and have them claim it. A little escape hole in the law. Isn't that amazing? So doctors go around thinking, "Gee someone over at Cincinnati says we should continue to use Tamoxifen." 1#32:33

Now Tamoxifen is blocked in the breast, but it is oestrogenic in the uterus and it causes cancer of the uterus. Now normally cancer of the uterus is a very benign disease. It shows up as a little bleeding here and there. And you find it, you do a pap smear and you see abnormal cells and you remove the uterus and it has gone, OK. 1#32:56

If you get cancer of the uterus when you are on Tamoxifen it is a different ball game instead of zero deaths there is 87% of you will die. It is a very rapid untreatable malignancy if it is caused by Tamoxifen. Tamoxifen also increases your risk of strokes and blindness and it does no good. There is no test that shows that it works. And yet that is what the doctor gives you because he knows that your own oestrogen is going to cause the breast cancer in the other breast. Or he might recommend let us remove the other breast right now. Then you won't get it, and women are buying that. Instead of saying let us find what is causing this and we can correct the underlying metabolic imbalance and then it won't happen.

So this is what happened in the year 2000 in the matters of HRT and mammograms we can no longer rely on statements and claims made by conventional medicine. They have been lying to you for thirty – forty years. And this year 2002 proved that, everybody knows that now. And guess who they go to say "help us fix the problem." They go to the people who made the problem. 1#34:12

HRT should be abandoned, conventional HRT should be abandoned.

OK isn't that fun?

I'm going to show you the slide from the last one in Canada. This is the curve of breast cancers and the curve of deaths from breast cancer and these are the years following fifty thousand women here. These are the breast cancers found with and without mammograms. Breast cancers find a little micro-calcification every once in a while on a thing that doesn't become a tumour. And that is called a carcinoma-in-situ. Ductal-carcinoma-in-situ. If this is the site that I'm standing on, or picture a lawn, if you had a dandelion here and there that would be dandelion-oma-in-situ. If you had a huge mound of dandelions that is growing and no grass could grow underneath, it is eating away the place where the grass should grow and it is becoming a huge mound. And is palpable, you could feel it if you were blind. You could feel it then that's called, that's a true carcinoma – “oma” means tumour. So carcinoma-in-situ means a tumour that is not a tumour, it is an oxymoron. 1#35:31

The doctors in England wrote an editorial about this "Have our American brothers run amok?" They know what in-situ means and they know what “oma” means, “oma” means tumour. It is not a tumour it is a scattering of little cells here and there that don't look quite right and they are not cancer. And they can only be picked up by mammograms. That is why you have a slightly higher curve for the mammogram finding and they are calling it a type of breast cancer. They love to call it a type of breast cancer, 'cause it won't kill you because it is not breast cancer. So what ever they do to it you have a five year survival of 100%. Even if you do nothing you have a five year survival of 100%, but they give those folks Tamoxifen and so they say look survival is 100%. 1#36:24

They call it carcinoma-in-situ, at any rate it didn't change the ultimate death rate. This is the death rate on people who had mammograms and this is the death rate on people who didn't - the usual care group. And you'll see that over the period of years that there is actually more deaths due to breast cancer in the ones who are doing the mammograms. And there is no evidence of any survival benefit. That is it, you just have to accept that. There is no argument here, it is a stupid test to do. Thermograms are probably going to turn out to be much better.

But the whole point is we know how to prevent the breast cancer and that is what I'm going to teach you. 1#37:07

First you have to understand how hormones work. They are compounds that are made by one part of the body that circulate around in the blood stream and are active at other parts of the body. They carry a message, they are messengers.

However that simple explanation isn't quite right. They float around in the bloodstream and then they have to get out of the bloodstream, they have to get into the extra-cellular space. They have to get in the space between the cells. Because they need to combine with a receptor, that R stands for receptor inside the cell. 1#37:42

The cell, you have 70 trillion cells did you know that? And they have to anticipate the arrival of the hormone by making a receptor. It is like making a phone so you can get a phone call. The cell has to be able to do that. Not all hormones necessarily affect all cells in your body. For instance oestrogen affects primarily breast, so you grow breasts. It affects the lining of the uterus so you build up a layer of blood every month to try to make a place for a fertilised egg to implant, so there are certain parts. But in general these receptors are all through the body and especially in terms of progesterone. 1#38:24

I can find no part of the body that doesn't have progesterone receptors, this will become important later, I'll show you. 1#38:30

But at any rate the important thing here is the hormone doesn't work by itself. If the hormone came floating through those doors and we are a cell, say a fat cell, or a brain cell or a muscle cell. If that hormone floated in there and floated on out the other side, if we didn't have a receptor for it we would never know. Just as there are radio waves going through us right now and we don't have our receptors on for that or we would hear radios or television, what ever you have to have the receptor, so the cells have to make the receptor. Guess what tells the cells to make the receptor? 1#39:01

Oestrogen, when you the females and the boys at puberty start making oestrogen, it is the oestrogen that tells the cells to make the progesterone receptor. Because sooner or later progesterone will be on the way and we need to have a receptor for it. This proves that these 2 hormones work in tandem, the work together just like yin and yang. They do different things but it is the combined, it is the combination of all of both sides that produces the ultimate benefit to the person.

So at any rate once they bind together you have a receptor and hormone together it goes up to the boardroom, up in the nucleus of the cell, and there is where you have your 23 pairs of chromosomes. Now chromosomes are very interesting. To study them, they would take a cell and select out the nucleus and then flambé it. They'd heat it up and the heat would cause it all to contract. They are long filamentous chains, if one were as thick as my wrist it would extend from here to Sacramento. Thinner than a hair, and we have, I forget what it is twenty five thousand gene cites or two hundred and fifty thousand gene cites but what it has to do is traverse up and down the gene cites on the chromosomes until it finds just the right one. The combining to the receptor in the beginning depends, it is like a lock and a key, the 2 molecules have to be fitting identically. You have to have a spot on the receptor protein so that the hormone molecule fits just inside, or a portion of it. It has to be perfect and then it goes up there and finds the right gene. Activates a gene which through messenger RNA activates a rhybosome to make enzymes which then tell the cell what to do, they carry out the metabolic function of the cell. 1#40:58

So the hormones carry messages they travel through the bloodstream, they have to be the free hormone they have to combine with the receptor, they have to get into the nucleus and once they have done that in the nucleus they let go. The receptor lets go of the hormone and the hormone floats along, keeps doing that until sooner or later it goes through the liver. And the liver coats with a great big globulin protein which makes it water soluble, which means it is no longer doing it's work. It is riding around in the serum and when it goes through the kidney it will go out in the urine. So that is the whole life story of a progesterone and that is the way they all have to work. 1#41:34

So these hormones are all very fat soluble. All the sex hormones are made from cholesterol. You need cholesterol, you make cholesterol by eating sugar. If you eat way too much sugar and highly refined starches you will make too much cholesterol. But in general you have to make cholesterol to make the hormones. They are very important, cholesterol is very important for lots of other things. Cholesterol is not the evil that everybody thinks it is. It is a necessary factor for life among mammals. 1#42:09

At any rate the hormone is made out of cholesterol so it is very fatty. In fact all the sex hormones are the most fatty substances in the body. The oestrogen, the testosterone and the progesterone that you make are very fat soluble, so being fat soluble they are not found in the serum. The serum is the watery part of the blood. They ride on the fatty parts that are not in the serum, that might be floating in the serum but they are separate. And they might be riding on the red blood cells, because the membranes of red blood cells are made of fats, so that is where they ride. 1#42:43

Now when the doctors does their blood test, he draws blood and spins the blood around in a centrifuge and the watery part goes to one end and the fat goes to the other end and then he looks for the hormone in just the watery end.

I'm reminded of the story of a couple that went out to dinner in San Francisco they came out at night and it was dark and they had to get to their car park where the car was parked. And up ahead under a street lamp they saw a guy on his hands and knees. So they went up to him and said "Pardon me sir do you need any help? Are you in some trouble?"

He said, "Well I lost my car keys and I'm trying to find them."

"Oh we'll help you." So they spent half an hour looking around under the sidewalk, weeds and the kerb and the street, couldn't find it. 1#43:30

And they said, "How did you come to lose your car keys?"

"Well," he said, "I came through that dark alley over there, I was going through the alley and getting something out of my pocket and it is possible I could have dropped they keys over here."

They said, "Well why are you looking here?"

He said, " Because the light is so much better."

Well this is what doctors do, they do this dumb test they think it is Blood test and the lab guy pins it down and separates the watery part from the fat part and then he looks for the hormone in the watery part. There is no way he can give you a result that which is meaningful. 1#44:07

The same Dr. Cummings 4 years ago did a huge study about this and said "the serum levels are of no importance whatsoever, they are totally irrelevant." Doesn't say it is awkward thing to do or that the results aren't quite right or something like that, No, he said, "it is irrelevant, don't do it." 1#44:35

You want to find out how much of the real hormone you have and that is done by doing saliva. If you apply some progesterone or your body makes some progesterone, how does it end up in the saliva? Obviously it circulates throughout the bloodstream and in the salivary gland it filters out directly into the saliva. You have got the measurement of how much of the real hormone is there. Very simple, science has been using this for twenty – twenty five years. This is what the major science hormone science research is based on, on saliva tests. 1#45:09

Your typical doctor and I get this all the time. I get phone calls all day long. "I talked to my doctor about saliva.” and he said, "There is nothing to it."

I said, "Your doctor is ignorant." There is no way around it. He has no idea that he made a very ignorant statement. You just have to be nice to him and say, "Oh excuse me doctor but I can get you two hundred references that show you that this is done, that this is in science." 1#45:37

Now you know that, this is how hormones work. Now when this hormone passes through the liver by itself the liver binds it to this globulin. And bound to the globulin it can no longer fit with the receptor so it is no longer active. So you see the importance is you have to know if you are going to make any progress in understanding breast cancer you have to know how much of the real hormone is around.

Something is happening to women's ovaries. Something is damaging women's ovaries before they are born, so when they grow up their little corpus luteum, their little follicles when they ovulate don't work as a progesterone factory anymore. 1#46:21

By the age of thirty five 50% of the people on this continent and in England no longer are making the progesterone their mums made. I'll be telling you what that something is. I'll tell you right now. It is the pesticides from petrochemicals; we have seventy thousand of these in the environment. They out gas out of the carpet, they out gas out of the paint, they out gas out of, they are in your salad dressing but primarily they are in their sprays. If you have a fly in the house and you spray the house you are getting and you're going to be breathing all those things. It doesn't hurt the adult, it is a tiny dose. In adult your cells are mature they have been differentiated, they are difficult to harm with this, but it hurts the baby. If you are pregnant it hurts the baby. If it is a female baby it damages the ovaries so they can't produce progesterone when that baby grows up. If it is a male baby they can't produce sperm when the male baby grows up. Sperm counts have fallen over 50% in men by the time they are thirty five compared to previous generations. 1#47:30

This is a fact of life, we are poisoning the public if you want to read about it, read "Our Stolen Future" it is a wonderful book it is written by a lady PhD and all of the veterinarians who have been studying this process that is going on in wild life populations they can't reproduce. They can't reproduce because their females can't make their progesterone any more and the males aren't making enough sperm any more. It happens to birds, it happens to amphibians, it happens to all the animals that they have seen, the crocodiles, the Florida panther, the salmon in the North Sea.

All sorts of things, all of our industrial all of those poisons get into the waterways, they get into the oceans, they get into the rivers. The beluga whale in the St Lawrence Seaway they are all the same. They have all been damaged. You don't find it in the adults, you find it in the babies so it is a generation later. So when our scientists looked at, let's feed some of this poison to some animals and see what happens. They fed it to the adult animals and nothing happened so they said "it must be alright" So they allowed it to be sold seventy thousand different types of this. They are all poisonous. Had they watched to see what the babies would be like they would have seen it and now they have done that. So Theo Colborn was the chief author and it is called "Our Stolen Future." 1#49:03

The idea is such a rise in people having cancer, such a rise in people who are having early miscarriages that if the same increase continues to occur over the next two generations the ability to carry a baby will be lost. So we have two generations to straighten this out.

The second role is the precursor role. Once the body goes to all work of making a progesterone molecule out of cholesterol the body then uses the progesterone to make the other hormones. It makes androstenedione, testosterone, estrone, estrodiol, estriol, corticol-steroids and aldosterone. Our body does that because that is more efficient. Now if you are missing the progesterone the body can still do it, but it just doesn't do it as well so the body uses that then you have all these intrinsic effects. 1#49:54

Now realise this slide is 50 years old This is what students were taught 50 years ago. It does all these things protects against breast cancer, protects against endrometrial cancer I'm not going to go through them all we have them in our book, restores oestrogen receptor sensitivity, stimulates new bone formation and this is just a small list of what we know now. One time I started to make a list of what we know now and I couldn't put it on the paper couldn't see anything but this is enough to show all this. So it is a marvellous hormone and has receptors for it all through the body. Now when you compare oestrogen level with progesterone you find that where one stimulates the breast the other one protects the breast against fibrocysts. One increases body fat the other one helps use fat for energy. 1#50:41

Now the farmers all know that one, they take steers, steers are these young cattle who have been castrated no more testosterone. And they feed them a little oestrogen, a little nickels worth of oestrogen a day and that causes them to grow and get a lot of body fat, gain weight and retain water so they get their market weight cheaper and less time and the farmer makes more money. So the farmers know that.

Now when the doctor gives you the oestrogen and you get fat and you retain water and you go to him he says, "Oh dear, I guess I didn't give you enough." So he gives more and now he creates heavy bleeding and clots, irregular bleeding and you gain more weight and so that doctor creates the situation where you start having heavy bleeding. so then you get a hysterectomy. 1#51:34

Now think of this, have you ever head of Dr Pavlov? He showed that positive reinforcement can change functional behaviour 1#51:44

So what happens to the doctor who feeds you all this extra oestrogen? You get all these diseases you get fibrocystic, all these over here, you get poor sugar control, you get increased blood clotting, you get more strokes, decreased libido all of these things happen. It interferes with thyroid hormone salt and fluid he gets to treat all of that. One thing after another he gets to treat as long as he keeps you on excess oestrogen and creates oestrogen dominance. He has on ongoing woman with symptoms that are going to have to be treated for the rest of her life. It is called a cash cow. You follow that? Eventually one of the things you get from the oestrogen kills you, that's the end of that cash cow but he has got more coming. 1#52:34

So this is what had me start thinking about balance because it isn't the presence or absence of these things. It is the way they work together, there is a certain balance which is beneficial and not harmful. That is Mother Nature's intention. It is only when the doctor takes over and said "I'll give the hormone. These are the doses that you ought to take." He creates the imbalance which kills you. So it is not the absolute number, it is the balance. 1#53:10

This is the progesterone molecule again and this shows that Mother Nature uses it for making estrone, uses it for making testosterone, uses it for making cortisol, uses it for making corticosterone. What I want you to see and this usually takes up to a year or two of looking at these molecules. You'll see that if you look at the next one the only difference is this little hydrogen and oxygen that is put on on this corner and one extra oxygen right there. So it is the difference of a water molecule, couple hydrogens and an oxygen. By putting those atoms in you change this hormone completely. By changing the configuration of the hormone you change what it does. 1#53:54

This hormone for instance tells bone cells to make more bone. This tells bone cells don't make any more new bone. The opposite message just from the movement of one or two little atoms. Same thing with these two, these two different types of cortisone they do two different things and the only difference is this little attachment here of another hydroxyl group. And look down here on estrone and testosterone. This is estrone and this is testosterone if you move this hydrogen from here to here you then have that and you add a couple of carbons here to take away that double bond you now have testosterone. 1#54:39

They differ by just one or two atoms. This one tells the baby to grow up with a vagina, no penis, no testes but to develop breasts and be able to have babies. This one tells the baby to grow up with a penis, no vagina, no breasts but more muscle mass. Imagine the difference, and the difference in the atoms is so tiny. So the message of this slide is the configuration has to perfect to do work and any change in the configuration will change what the hormone does.

Now I'll show you what conventional medicine does. It uses progesterone to add here an acetate group. Acetate group and an extra methyl group it is no longer progesterone, it is a totally different thing it is medroxyprogesterone acetate they call it Provera. The doctor is taught to believe that is progesterone. 1#55:41

I went to the Marin County Breast Cancer Health Watch and tried to explain this to them. And they said, "Oh, no this is progesterone." I had to leave the office they would not accept the fact that this was not progesterone. You could look up in any bio-chemical book and you would get what real progesterone is. That's progesterone and this is not it is as simple as that.

This does not have the benefits of real progesterone, it has lots of terrible bad side effects. It also kills you with heart attacks, it also increases your risk of breast cancer whereas progesterone protects 1#56:19

And the people that you trust here in the county, the so called experts you go to, they think that is progesterone. I don't know what it will take to do it, for them to understand. They won't open a book and take a look. 1#56:34

Now this is Norgestril, the most common of the birth control pills and they call that progesterone too. But look it is not made of progesterone it is made of this. They get some horse testosterone, you see this is identical to this, even to this is the same, they add a little ethylene group up here and they put that in the birth control pills and they tell the doctors that that is progesterone.

Now when the women take this birth control pill they start growing facial hair from the testosterone they are getting, they go to the doctor and say, "Gee, I don't think all this acne and all this facial hair is right I'm not, I don't think I should I should take this birth control pill." 1#57:13

And the doctor will say, "Yes that's the progesterone effect."

Can you imagine and these are the people who tell you that you should go out looking for some cause of the breast cancer. These are the people who don't know they are giving you the breast cancer. These are the people who don't understand that HRT doubles your risk of breast cancer. The more people you get on HRT the more people who are going to die of breast cancer. 1#57:39

What about some evidence? What does oestrogen do to the breast? What does progesterone do? There is doctor, Dr Fournier De ?Liniere? of France they have been studying this for years. They have been doing studies showing what oestrogen does and progesterone does in the breast for years and they cannot make doctors listen.

So this study was published just a couple of years ago in Fertility and Sterility 1995 on young women in Taiwan. They got these women to agree, they were perfectly healthy women. There is section of their cycle when they have their period when their ovaries are not making any hormone. They make the hormone, the oestrogen starts about the 7th or 8th day after the cycle starts and the progesterone kicks in about day 11 or 12. So you are only oestrogen dominant for 3 or 4 days and then the progesterone kicks in. So they went to the time of their cycle when they are not making any hormones and they gave them either a progesterone cream or an oestrogen cream or a combination. 1#58:50

The progesterone cream was just 25mg, just one little dab and the estrodiol was 1.5mg about the same dose that men, that doctors use and the combination was half and half, then they gave a control cream a very nice little study, and then biopsied the breast. After a couple of days they biopsied the breast to see how much of the hormone was there, so on the cream that had no hormone it was zero, this was the control cream no hormone was being made. From the progesterone one it went from 0.6 to 66. It went up one hundred fold just from one little dab of progesterone on your skin. Just ask yourself, "How did it get to the breast?" Do you think it was magic? Do you think some how it went out in the air and you some how breathed it in and got to the breast? No, it went through the blood stream and there it is in the breast increased one hundred fold. And the estrodiol is absorbed through the kin this went from ten to ninety this is another one hundred fold increase. And when you gave half and half this is what happened, they got half and half. This is proof that applying it to the skin allows it to be absorbed and gets to the breast. 1#60:07

Then they did more than that, they did two types of measurement to see if the cells in the breast were affected by the hormone. For the placebo, the cells in the breast had a certain activity rate that is indicated by this bar. Cells in the breast are always being newly created. They double one cell becomes two cells and it is called proliferation. This goes on all the time. So this would be the normal rate. 1#60:40

Progesterone slowed the normal rate down very much, it stopped the proliferation. The excess proliferation of cells is the steps what is happening in front of your eyes that is that it is going to become cancer cells it is a step along the way to cancer cells. Cells that proliferate too much and don't slow down are the ones that become the cancer cells. So progesterone slows it down. 1#61:08

Estrodiol just about doubled it, doubled the rate and when you gave the combination it brought it back to where it was the way Mother Nature intended. And here is another way of doing the same test and they had the same results. The same thing progesterone protected the proliferation; oestrogen increased it, the combination kept it where it ought to be. So now we have the evidence that yes oestrogen might cause the breast to make cancer and the progesterone prevents. 1#61:33

But they did one more test, they did blood tests at the same time, they had thought they would see these hormones as they went through the blood stream, that there would be a surge in the blood stream. They used, not knowing any better, it was 1995 theses guys had been doing research for years. They didn't know that the real hormone rides on red blood cells and that the amount in the serum is only for the hormone that has passed through the liver and had become protein bound so it is water soluble So it will go through the liver, then through the blood stream and then go out through the kidneys and be gone. They looked in the blood stream. 1#62:08

They found that it readily penetrated the skin increasing breast progesterone one hundred fold. It induced a biological response it lowered proliferation rates of the breast duct cell that's where the cancer cells start. But it did not increase the serum progesterone. Isn't that amazing? They didn't find it there, so people say, "How could you get those results?" People tended to believe that it didn't happen so they repeated the test, they repeated the test on older women who were menopausal and they got the same results. It didn't dawn on them that there is another part of the blood. And that the hormone is carried by the fatty part of the blood. So here we have further proof that this is the way that it works because you can easily measure the fatty part of the blood. 1#62:53

Now does progesterone have an effect on breast cancer? People say, "Well it is one thing to prevent it but I already have my breast cancer what are you going to do? What have you got for me? Am I going to die from this because you tell me all the treatments are worthless. Well let me show you this. This is by Dr Moore in England published British Journal of Cancer 1996. He went to the top hospitals in England and he said, "When you do surgery for breast cancer I want you to draw some blood and set it aside." Now he to didn't know about, the best way to do it would be to a saliva test. However if you have zero amount in the blood, watery part of the blood that's meaningful. If you have a lot you can tell a lot or a little but you just can't tell the middle parts very well. So he saved the blood samples of people who had breast cancer surgery and then after eighteen years he selected out those who had breast cancer with positive lymph nodes and he looked up all the women to see if they were still alive. Some were still alive, these were people who had metastases to their lymph nodes on the day of surgery so he looked to see what difference there was in the blood test he had collected eighteen years before. And he took those that had a pretty good level, over 4 nanograms per millilitre and he found in those people about 65% were still alive eighteen years later where as those who had practically no progesterone on the day of surgery only about 30% were alive eighteen years later. 1#64:35

So the fact of your progesterone on the day of surgery changed your survival rate by 100%. There is no treatment available to you that is that powerful. The treatment that you get maybe changes the ultimate survival by 5% this changed survival by 100%. At any point you can start using the progesterone and you could stop the continued growing of your breast cancer cells. 1#65:01

Now he started this in 1978 and I started in my practice in 1978 to use progesterone cream for women for all kinds of reasons for those who had osteoporosis, for those who had fibrocystic breasts, for those who had weight gain, those who had tender breasts, those who had water retention, headaches. All those things that I could find that were due to oestrogen dominance I added the progesterone. There is not one study in the literature that shows that adding progesterone has any deleterious effect on anybody. 1#65:35

You cannot be allergic to it, if you were allergic to it you would not have made it through your embryo life. There is no study that shows there is any harm, so I did it. And then when I decided to stop practice twelve years later but I continued contacts with lots of patients. I discovered none of my patients who had had breast cancer originally and then I gave them progesterone after that none of these people ever died of breast cancer. I didn't have any people die of breast cancer. 1#66:05

Now I have been giving this talk for ten - twelve years around the country and around the world, I do this a lot. And I have doctors here and there Dr Leonetti in Pennsylvania, doctors in several places in Florida, doctors in Colorado, doctors in Alaska, doctors all over the world who have been doing this for now over ten years and they call me and they write me and they say. "I have more than three thousand five hundred women in my practice, they are on progesterone and nobody gets breast cancer." 1#66:30

You realise, what I just said? If you had the right amount of progesterone you are not going to get breast cancer. If you had breast cancer and you add it, it will save your life further on down. It will double your chances of survival eighteen years later. That's not bad, that's good. At no risk and at practically no cost. 1#66:58

# # CD 2 of 2

Here's a company who made a product. They made Premarin from pregnant mares' urine. Extracting the hormones, the horse hormones that are in there and they made Provera which is altered progesterone, that is no more progesterone at all. And they make a combination so you can't separate one from the other, and they gave it to people, and they made all these p roblems. And so people over the years have been doing tests showing that yes this causes the breast cancer. These are all studies just in the last 10 - 15 years that all show the same thing so it isn't that the Women's Health initiative, but here is this company that was making this product and they were free to sell it. They had the sanction of the Food and Drug Administration. 2#00:46

Imagine you go to the FDA and you say, "I have a product that is pretty good for hot flashes. I'd like your OK so that I could sell it for hot flashes." 2#00:55

They say, "Well does it have any other side effects?!

"Well, yes it causes breast cancer, increases strokes, increases heart disease, causes gall bladder disease, people die sooner, they have a miserable life, they retain water, they get fat, they lose their marriages. You know all these things happen." And you know there's no way you are going to get FDA approval. How did they get it in the beginning? Here they claim that they are our guardians. That before a drug can be sold they test it to see if it is safe, there was no test to see if it was safe. They managed to keep this up for over 40 years without having to do the test. Then they took the tax money from the Women's Health Initiative and used that to do the test that the pharmaceutical company should have done. 2#01:38

They took a pharmaceutical product and tested it and found that it killed women. Why wasn't that done 30 years ago? How many women have been killed needlessly? I think there is a law suit someplace. 2#01:51

Somebody has been lying to you for all these years, on an easily disprovable fact. So I blame the pharmaceutical companies, then I blame the doctors for being so compliant as to write all those prescriptions. But you see the positive reinforcement they get is they get to go to these meetings for free get to treat all those problems. 2#02:14

Now people say, "Do you know the mechanism? We would tend to believe you if you knew exactly how oestrogen caused the breast cancer.” Turns out that 5 years ago there was symposium sponsored by the National Cancer Institute in Washington DC. They invited 26 speakers from cancer research centres around the world to come to Washington DC and tell what they had learned about how oestrogen causes cancer. 2#02:45

All 26 of them had found mechanisms by which the oestrogen causes the cancer. They not only found the mechanism that causes the breast cancer, but that it also caused prostate cancer. You'd think that a study, now the doctor that was the leader speaker Dr Cavallieri. Dr Cavallieri called me he said, "John you got to come out to Washington DC This is going to break their back. We have all this evidence, we know the mechanisms, we know how oestrogen does this, there is no longer any doubt." He was giving the main speech there were 25 other people giving their references. "You gotta come out."

I couldn’t, I was on another trip but I told some friends of mine on the East coast and they went. They called me back and said, "this was the greatest conference I've ever been to." 26 sets of authorities all showed how oestrogen causes these cancers we now know what to do. We have to stop this oestrogen dominance.” There wasn't one story in the newspaper, no remark on the radio, nothing on television, nothing anywhere. It wasn't told to the doctors, it wasn't in their journals. There was nothing.

The National cancer Institute has it available. You can call them and they can send it to you. 2#04:01

And I am going to show you two examples of these mechanisms that are easy to understand and so we know how this happens. There is no longer a doubt. It's not gee whiz, maybe it correlates, maybe the statistics are not right, maybe it's something, maybe it is something in the air, maybe it's something in the water. No! It's the estrogen.

Now here's one, this is Dr Formby down at UC Santa Barbara. He has several PhD's. He is an expert in genetics, how the chromosome works, he is an expert in hormones, an expert in bio-chemistry, he is an expert at finding the product that the genes make. 2#04:46

When genes activate something they make a product, ends with a product that is in the cell.

Estrodiol activates, what he did was to take breast cancer cells first, then he took endometrial cancer cells and then he took prostate cancer cells he found the same thing in all of them. Estrodiol activates an uncogene BCL2. An uncogene is a known cancer gene. You have, all of us have known cancer genes in us. But we have other genes that keep it quiet. There is an uncogene called BCL2 that stimulates cell hyperplasia and inhibits apotosis of the breast and the uterus, this leads to cancer. 2#05:26

Apotosis means cells are programmed to die, Your skin cells are programmed to die, your hair cells are programmed to die, your red blood cells only last for 120 days. Your white blood cells only last 24 - 48 hours. Everything is programmed to die and to be re-made. This is how you stay healthy as you re-make the good ones, you don't keep the bad.

If you have cells in your breast that are multiplying, hyperplasia, multiplying more rapidly, if they don't die on time your breasts are going to get bigger and bigger and you'd have to carry them in a wagon and walk along with your breast dangling in a wagon. But they do, they die on time and then white blood cells come in and clean them up and new cells are made, this is what happens.

Here they found that Estrodiol activates a gene that stimulates hyperplasia and inhibits apotosis and that's the direct thing that causes cancer. 2#06:22

Conversely progesterone activates different gene P53. P53 inhibits the action of inhibiting cell hyperplasia and restoring normal apotosis. It therefore acts against cancers, stops cancer from growing. And the balance of these two hormones and their respective effects on P53 and BCL2 is a major determinant of breast and uterine cancer. Now this is what he got published. He got this published so everybody knows. This was in the Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Science 1998. Soon be 5 years ago. No one has disputed this.

We know what happens you can measure the gene. You give the estrodiol bango! The cancer gene turns on, he measured the product. So he did the same thing with prostate cancer cells and got the same results. So he sent them to the same journals to be published and they refused.

And he said, "Why are you refusing it now?"

And they said, "Well we gave it to peer review group, three doctors and we will send you their results."

One of them said, "It was a wonderful study very well done and it should be published." 2#07:38

The second peer reviewer said, "This is wonderful study, very well done, but I don’t believe it." Didn't want to! He had no criticism of it, nothing.

The third one said, "It is a wonderful study very well done and if he would do it with a synthetic progestin then we would publish it."

You won't do it with a synthetic progestin because it won't work. Synthetic progestins do not do what progesterone does. So he couldn't believe this, so he is trying to start up a study. To get the University of California to do a study but it has all been established there is no doubt. 2#08:14

Now we come to Dr Cavalieri. Dr Cavalieri is quite a character. His first name is Ercule. Ercule, Hercules. Ercule Cavalieri isn't that beautiful? He is about 75 years old, 78 years old. He has been head of the cancer research at the University of Nebraska for 25 years. He has been on the track of 'how does the body handle extra oestrogen?'

And he found that of the 2 different oestrogens, estriol is perfectly fine. Estriol is the oestrogen that we make when you are pregnant. It prepares the uterus for the passage of the baby down through the birth canal and makes the cells so strong and healthy and so happy that after they are torn up by a 10lb baby they all heal just fine. And that's what estriol does it softens the cervix, prepares the vagina and it doesn't cause breast cancer at all, so forget it.2#09:12

Here we have estrodiol and estrone, this is in Premarin, Estrodiol is estrase those are the 2 oestrogens and in the liver they inter convert with each other. Doesn't matter which one the doctor gives you, it changes into the other one anyway.

They get all these people, guess what conventional medicine wants to do with your public money next? Instead of using Prempro they want to use estrodiol. 2#09:39

They said, "Oh, now we'll do an estriodiol study."

Why will they not do a progesterone study? Because it would stop the cancer industry cold, that's why. There is great money to be made in fighting cancer.

I'm going to tell you about Dr Cavalieri. The estrodiol and estrone enter and go through the liver. The P450 system turns then into what we call carticol oestrogens. That means it adds an extra hydroxyl and then it methylates that and carboxy methyl transfers, So if you have good methylating food in your in your stomach and once methylated it is totally safe and can't hurt anybody.

However, if you subject yourself to eating trans-fatty acids like the butter substitute, margarine, and you eat a lot of that in the United States. These trans-fatty acids they, these trans fatty acids originate as a seed oil or fish oils or animal oil. And then they are modified by heat and pressure and hydrogenation and so on to become something that is stable on the shelf and is oily in consistency. And they sell it to you as safflower oil or corn oil but it is no longer those oils. They have been changed. 2#11:05

There is a marvellous book out called "Know Your Fats" it is by Dr Mary S Enig, E-N-I-G. She is a professor at the University of Maryland. She is the one that the government hires to test the fats in the foods so they can put the information on the nutritional content. So she tests the food and finds out how much of these trans-fatty acids they have and the government refuses to publish it. It buries that information, in Canada it is on every label. In the United States it is not.

So you eat these bad fats that all cause cancer and so it does it right here it causes a quinone. A quinone is a high nitrogen bit that will damage your DNA, your genes. And then if you continue and don't know how to eat the amino acids that have sulphur, sulphates in them like methianme and cystene, what happen is it causes addox, things that add to the genes and causes mutations and leads directly to cancer.2#12:12

Now Dr Cavalieri has found all of the things in these steps that go this way. And he has found the nutritional ingredients that you need to make it go to the methylated oestrogens that are perfectly safe for you. And he has proven it with other animals and he has got clinical studies going right now and he has written a marvellous paper about how to stop it from going this way and the people will not publish it. 2#12:42

His publishers are the National Academy of Science. He has been doing this for years. He called then up and said, "Why are you not publishing? I have explained to people what they can use so they don't get breast cancer. It is 27 years of work and we know how to stop this, just using nutrition."

And they said, "Dr Cavalieri we wanted you to find a medicine to treat breast cancer. We didn't want you to find some way to stop it." They actually told him that!

Does this sound like a science problem or a greed problem or a money problem here? The science, there is no problem, we know what causes the breast cancer. We know what you should do so you don't get breast cancer. 2#13:30

At any rate this is Dr Cavalieri same work with the pictures of the quinones and all that, it is the same thing. And they refused to publish what it does.

So at any rate 20 years ago I tried to figure out:- what is it that causes oestrogen dominance? The man’s question here, “How does this come about?” Well it was clear to me that if you eat too much sugar and refined starches that always happens. You always end up making more oestrogen. And if you do have more body fat you are going to make more oestrogen in the body fat. But if you eat the s ugars you will make more oestrogen. 2#14:09

You see our body cannot help but absorb sugar when you eat it. The body has no choice, it gets absorbed whether you like it or not. And it goes into your blood stream and goes to the liver and the liver sorts it all out and sends it to the fat cells where it is turned into fat. You have no place in your body where you can cut it open and say, "Whoa look at all that sugar." It doesn't happen, you don't have it free any place. You take people who eat a lot of sugar and cut them open and open them up, look and say,"Whoa look at all that fat." That's what the sugar becomes. 2#14:40

So when it becomes fat it starts making more oestrogen. Over here any excessive calorie intake will do it, but the big one is impaired liver function. Now when I wrote this I was thinking of cirrhosis impaired liver function or people with hepatitis C but the more I look into it I discover impaired liver function is very common in our society. And we make it worse by taking drugs that stop the liver from being able to do it's work in the business of getting oestrogen out of the system, metabolising oestrogen. 2#15:15

I mentioned the P450 system in the liver, well guess what? Prozac stops the P450 system from working. So someone has oestrogen dominance, they have depression, they have headaches, they are not doing well, they can't tolerate stress, they go to the doctor. They go to the doctor and he puts them on Prozac. That increases their oestrogen dominance, they can't excrete their own oestrogen. So here we have impaired liver function. Yeah, we do have people who drink too much but actually the liver does pretty well with that. But if you have Prozac you're damaged, you can't do that. 2#15:50

Then we have environmental oestrogen is fed to steers. Now oestrogen that is fed to steers is not destroyed by the steer, it is just stored in the steer's fat. And when you eat that steer, sliced up by your meat market you are going to be getting that oestrogen but in addition they give these steers grain, corn and grain that has been sprayed by the xeno-oestrogens of the pesticides. These are petrochemical products that cannot be destroyed in nature. They are all fat soluble, they will pass from the steer to you, they are oestrogenic, they damage your ability and particularly they damage the baby that you are carrying. So the baby will then get the cancer later on. And then when you die and put you in the ground it gets picked up by the local streams eventually. And it's in the oceans of today and it's already down at the South Pole. You can find these same xeno-oestrogens in the creatures that live down at the South Pole. It is in the fish around the world, it's in Lake Michigan. It's happening all over the place, wherever you have these pesticides going into you have animals carrying this stuff. And it will not be destroyed, and we have to stop that. 2#17:17

Then stress turns out is big, it does make more oestrogen. The cortisol is made by stress and the cortisol inhibits the progesterone receptors. So cortisol from stress interferes with your progesterone and you become oestrogen dominant. Not only that it causes anovulatory cycles. If you send somebody off to the University and they get a bad mark on their course and their boy friend leaves them and something lse happens. God knows what happens, under a lot of stress they are going to stop having periods for a while. This happens very often and when you are not ovulating you are not making the progesterone. 2#17:55

So but therefore the big one is Iatrogenic, this means doctor caused. Doctor caused - birth control pills, conventional ERT and HRT and I did this 20 years ago. 15 years ago, I can't remember time goes so fast, but that was my first attempt. And it wasn't bad because all this has found to be true. 2#18:16

However this is what I call the maze. This is where we are now and at first sight this is over impressive and you feel my god I'll never understand this but it is repeated in every chapter. Because in every chapter we take one part of it and explain how that makes oestrogen dominance. How these make oestrogen dominance, how this makes oestrogen dominance. How thyroid, melatonin, cortisol, the adrenal gland all can end up there. The breast stromic is affected. 2#18:49

Immune cytocines and poor diet and I am going to show you this one, so bit by bit through the book we teach you everyone of these and the big surprise is. Is at the end of the book you understand it all and number 2 you discover it is all preventable. You don't need any of these things. 2#19:06

Let me show you this one right down here the melatonin. If you do not get to sleep in a black, dark room, like at night your pineal gland does not turn on and make melatonin. If you don't make melatonin your ovaries aren't going to make progesterone. You don't make progesterone, you become oestrogen dominant. So nurses who work at night in the intensive care wards under bright lights, they try to sleep during the day when it isn't dark. Guess, are you surprised that their risk of breast cancer is 65% greater than if they didn't have that work? That work makes their risk of breast cancer go up by 65%. Well she could treat that by adding a little melatonin, but if you could teach them to measure their oestrogen and progesterone evels and they become oestrogen dominant. You could treat it by adding a little progesterone. You can protect them or you can give them the melatonin. These are all the things that cause oestrogen dominance and 80 to 90% of all the breast cancers come right here and they are all preventable 2#20:10

There are two types of genetic cancers one is called the her-2/new that's a gene And if the gene makes the wrong product it goes through some genetic problem it makes a breast cancer that is not connected to the hormones. So on that particular one I don't know what the treatment is I'm hopeful some bright person, fortunately it is only a tiny portion of the breast cancer. 2#20:43

The other genes that have all the publicity is the BRCA. Can you believe some people call it quot;berka"? BRCA it stands for "breast cancer". BRCA genes it is not one gene, it is a group of six genes and it turns out if you maintain a proper progesterone level it never causes breast cancer. It is only in the women who become oestrogen dominant that trips of the BRCA genes. So even that one can be controlled by the progesterone. So that's why we say we can easily stop 90% of the breast cancers just by learning this. 2#21:20

When Israel took out trans fatty acids, it wouldn't let any store in Israel make trans fatty acids, the number of breast cancers in five years fell fifteen per cent. It can be done, there is nothing to it. 2#21:33

In Canada they teach you which foods have the trans fatty acids. In America the government won't tell you how much is in the wheaties you eat.

So I am going to show you an example. This is the one where people eat too much sugar. You know our country is getting fatter? The little kids in school are getting fatter everybody is getting insulin resistance. If you over eat sugar all the time make all that insulin. You sometimes have insulin excess and so the body creates something that blocks the insulin from working so you have insulin resistance. So you have high sugar, high fat and insulin resistance at the same time and these are the people who end up getting all these cancers. 2#22:14

Now I want to show you where this comes from this is a study in Toronto. There's a lady from Toronto here today. A three fold increased risk from dying from breast cancer happens to people who have insulin resistance coming from eating all these sugars and the highly refined. You see maple syrup, pancakes, waffles these are all forms of sugar. Coca cola is 9 teaspoons of sugar, Pepsi is 9.2 teaspoons of sugar. 2#22:40

Our intake of sugar at the 1900's was 2 pounds per person per year and now it is 180 and in kids it is 300 pounds a year. That's almost a pound of sugar a day and we are killing ourselves doing this. Insulin resistance your cells cannot use the sugar you eat cause the insulin isn't working. So therefore it can only turn the sugars into fat.

Guess what cell in your body is never bothered by insulin resistance? Cancer cells. Cancer cells don't get insulin resistant they can use their fuel for growth and making more of themselves. They are going to out grow the normal cells and they are going to kill you. Why would you want to do this to yourself? The cancer cells have an advantage here and you are at a disadvantage. 2#23:35

I wrote up this just last night, rules for hormone supplements. You wonder how does this come about? What are they doing? In the typical HRT that's given they give it to people without ever checking to see if they actually are deficient in oestrogen. How many people have been put on HRT and your doctor never bothered to check? Right - everybody, that is the way it always works. He never checks for progesterone, he has no idea what your hormone levels are and he makes this big decision to put on potent hormones that can kill you.

So the first rule only give hormones to people who need it. That's what you would do for insulin, that's what you do for thyroid, that's what you do for practically everything. If someone needs it you give a little or you find a way to help them with it, might be a nutritional way or something. But you don't willy-nilly treat people with powerful medicines without finding out if they need it. So that's the first thing give hormones only to people who need it 2#24:40

Second one use the bio-identical hormones not the synthetic ones. The synthetic ones are designed to be different, they are something not found in nature. Your body doesn't know what to do with them. Your body can't use them to make another hormone like it can with progesterone. Progesterone can contribute to all the other good hormones. But you take a synthetic progestin and that's the end of the line. Your body doesn't even know how to get it out of your system. It occupies your progesterone receptors won't let go so your own progesterone can't work. So if you are going to add a hormone use the real one. We have real insulin, human insulin now we have human oestrogens, we have human progesterone, we have human testosterone. Why doesn't your doctor use it? Because they can't be patented, no one can make money. To make money you have to use the synthetics ‘cause they are unique not found in nature and can be patented2#25:41

You see this is a scam. The real hormones are there they have been there for sixty years, but doctors don't use them.

Use dosages that create normal physiological levels. That means they have to learn how to use saliva. They don't know what the dose does, they don't know where it goes in your body, they don't know what the level is in your tissues. They don't know anything about the fate of that hormone they are giving you. They could do a saliva test and see if you are in the range of people who live on this planet. They are giving oestrogen in doses eight to ten times larger than any human needs 2#26:18

First they violate the first one they give it to people who don't need it and they give it in doses that are eight to ten times higher than human need and this is reported in Lancet, this is reported in the New England Journal of Medicine. There is no doubt about this, everybody agrees that traditional HRT supplies eight to ten times more oestrogen than you need. It is because the doctor has no idea of what he is doing and he is not using bio-identical hormones, he is using synthetic ones, the ones that your body can't tolerate.

Conventional HRT routinely violates all of these guide lines. It should all be malpractice.

Now there's a couple of little things, tissue hormone levels can be measured by saliva testing but not by conventional serum tests. Serum tests are how much are floating around in the serum. That has nothing to do with how much gets to the tissues. 2#27:16

PS number two never give supplemental oestrogen with out proper balancing with progesterone. See that should be built in to all things. No one should give oestrogen to women without giving progesterone. The body continues to make oestrogen, women are not oestrogen deficient usually, only the skinny ones are. But if you decide to give some oestrogen to somebody you should always have progesterone. 2#27:42

We know what the ratio is, we know the ration should be 200:1. There should be 200 times as much progesterone as the estrodiol when you test with saliva. We can do that with a saliva test. I shouldn't even have to bother to say that because since everybody is oestrogen dominant. And you are getting all these oestrogens from the environment you certainly don't want give more oestrogen to people when you know that causes the cancer. But if you want to for some reason and you prove that they are a little low if you give a little oestrogen be sure to give the progesterone at the same time. 2#28:14

I hope you all now understand, there is no mystery about the problem with breast cancer. We know what the problem is scientists like myself and all around the world all know. I gave a talk yesterday in Nebraska no Kansas, University of Kansas to the post Ph D group that are teaching there and I showed then all this thing, they gave me a little hand at the end. Then the head of the bio-chemists department said, "John don't feel so bad about that you were preaching to the choir. We all know this. Why does medicine not know this? How can doctors continue to practice when all this information is known and you have done a nice job explaining it all." But the big thing is why does this go on? Why are they allowed to keep on killing people just f or the sake of the money that they make?

The Ph D Bio-Chemists they know these things. This is a secret that only the doctors don't know. Everybody else knows these things and so that's what I have been trying to do. I wrote five books since I quit practice in the last ten - twelve years and I am happy to report that these books sell very well and they are published in nine different languages. So we are just trying to get this information in the hands of people this is a terrible tragedy 2#29:34

You just need how to learn how to do it right and by reading the book you can see all of the various ways that the oestrogen dominance occurs. They are all preventable. You can make these choices you can stop it if you do have the breast cancer the best treatment in the world is to restore the progesterone level. Regardless of what other thing you do, you must do that. 2#30:01

We now know what the truth is and we know what we need to do now and it is up to you to spread the word.

Thank you very much 2#30:05

Applause


Master of Ceremonies The next portion of the seminar is devoted to questions and answers submitted by the seminar attendees. 2#30:21

JRL www.johnleemd.com, that will get to lots of answers about how to get books and things like that. And the other one the info one I don't get it directly my co-author Virginia Hopkins down in San Diego gets it and she answers most of the questions. She's brilliant, lot smarter than and some of the ones she thinks I need to answer she faxes to me. We have a monthly news letter that you can get through our web site johnleemd.com and in that we try to answer people's letters too and we get a lot of questions that a lot of people ask and those are the ones we use to answer because we are helping lots of people, we figure lots of people have the same question 2#31:09

I have talked a lot about getting saliva tests there is a certain art and skill to doing it right. If you want to test the hormones that your body is making say you are 25, 36, 40 years old and still having periods you can actually collect the saliva at any time. Because every 55 minutes your body is re-adjusting your hormone levels and so you can collect the saliva at any time and you will get meaningful results 2#31:35

However if you are at the point where you are supplying the progesterone no longer just measuring the amounts that the body is making but your are wanting to measure how much is coming through the skin then you have to know about the absorption excretion curve. It is absorbed through skin so it hits a maximum absorption in about two and a half hours. All the progesterone that was in the cream, see the cream is not absorbed. It is only the progesterone that gets absorbed, very few things go through the skin. You could take somebody's skin and make it into a bag and you could carry water with it. They do that with goats, you know that. 2#32:13

The skin is, water doesn't even go through skin you can stand buck naked in a rain storm and you will not absorb any water. However there are certain molecules that are small, fat soluble they don't have much of an electromagnetic charge they slip right through so they get in.

In the case of progesterone and testosterone find what the right number is because he's measuring it when it is mostly gone. And if you do the measurement two or three hours after applying it you are going to get a high number. The way to standardise the test when you are measuring the amount that you are putting on the skin is just to wait ten hours half way through the curve. So always collect the saliva ten hours after applying it 2#32:56

In the morning I apply my progesterone and testosterone about 7 o'clock in the morning. If I want to check my saliva I do it at 5 in the afternoon that is ten hours later. 2#33:05

So don't pay any attention to what the lab says about catching it in the morning or doing it at night it all depends on when you apply the cream. And then all subsequent tests you do it the same way then you have a way to compare one test with another because these are big changes that occur this high curve that develops and all goes out in twenty four hours.2#33:26

I have people call me and say, "I have been on the cream for two years and it doesn't absorb into my skin." I say, "How do you know that?" "Well I have checked with saliva tests and it doesn't show up. Of course they tried checking with these serum tests and of course it doesn't show up there but they say we tried serum tests

I said, "Well how long do you have to wait between applying the cream and doing it?" "Well my doctor told me to wait two weeks."

You know it is crazy, but at any rate we feel that is important information you are wasting your money if you don't know how to do it right. So that's why I think you ought to know, you see most labs don't even keep track of when you applied the cream. See Dr Zava does ask you, see that's why I like Dr Zava's lab he will ask you, "When did you last apply the cream?" And he has been doing this by the thousands and thousands so he can imagine in his mind where the curve would be to reach that point but the rest of us aren't quite as bright as Dr Zava. 2#34:24

So I like to standardise it and do it ten hours later then we can follow that and do it the same way the next time then we know whether you are going up or are going down. 2#34:33

Audience Question: The greater cancer death rate among women who give mammograms compared to those who don't is that statistically significant?

JRL: The curves show that there is slightly more women dying of the ones who took the mammograms. Now it could be that maybe have a different disease or it could be that there is something about passing X-rays through your breast every year increases it. And I don't know if it is statistically significant or not it doesn't matter to me. The point is there is no benefit. There is no reason to do that. By the way, most of you are too young, but there used to be a shoe store that, there used to be a machine that you could stand in and look down and, fluoroscope, and you could see the bones right through your shoes and everything. You know why they don't have those machines any more? Because if you take a little ten year old girls and have them do that a couple of times they are the ones that are going to get breast cancer when they are sixteen 'cause that X-ray is one of the things cause cells to change and to mutate. And mutate into things that cause cancer so they don't do that any more.

But you see they don't come out with headlines on things like that they just make the change and hope people forget. 2#35:42

Audience Question: Do you think mammograms are contributors?

JRL: They contribute to bad things in a lot of ways. I had a lot of patients who I would find a lump in or the patient themselves would find the lump and they would do a mammogram and the mammogram wouldn't show anything bad. So they would say it is nothing. And next year they have cancer spread through lungs and their ribcage and their backbones and up in their brain and every place else. So it causes false negatives 35% of the time. Thirty five percent of the time when you have a cancer there the machine misses it. Thirty five percent of the time when you don't have a cancer there the machine finds a little something that says oh we had better look into this. So it all ends up with biopsies and every other damned thing and it is better if you don't have it. Most countries around the world have given up on it. 2#36:30

Tamography is the coming thing, it is not the same as mammograms it reads different things. It'll often find hot spots see it measures temperature, it'll find areas where there is heat

If you have an underlying metabolic disorder you have a battle. You have got elements that are trying to say yes and other elements are saying no and there is a battle. Sometimes the battle leaves tiny little bits of calcium behind like debris from a real battle. Those little calcifications can be seen so that's the sign of a battle but heat is the sign of a battle too. So you can find that, if you have a woman who has a hot spot on one the breasts that's the place you should start looking. The measurement of heat you don't have to squish the breast to do it, you can do it from six feet away 2#37:15

Audience Question: Are there adverse effects from too much progesterone in the body?

JRL: Yes, generally in doses that are natural to humans on this planet there are no side effects whatsoever. However there are very clever people out there who manage to convince other people or the patient herself, convinces a series of different doctors to give her so much progesterone she five thousand maybe six thousand milligrams a day and she is acting very weirdly. It turns out that the liver tries its best to metabolise the excess progesterone and it does so by creating three versions of what are called pregnanes.

Pregnanes are the basic chassis but with pieces of it broken off that is how it is excreted and there is one called nano-pregnanolone or alo-pregnanolone is one of the three waste products. And normally it is a small amount. And in small amounts it has a calming effect on your brain but in large amounts it has an anaesthetic effect on the brain. In fact you can separate it out and use it as an anaesthetic to do brain surgery. 2#38:25

And so people who get into way too much progesterone and keep at it for weeks and weeks and months and months. They get to a point where they sit around at home and they don't get anything done and they can't carry on a conversation very well. And the husband doesn't understand and pretty soon the wife is in the psychiatrist’s office and given the diagnosis of depression. And then he of course then her treatment becomes Prozac and so she can't get rid of her oestrogen and everything becomes worse all because somebody forgot to measure her hormones.

I have never seen a side effect when you use normal physiological doses. 2#38:59

Audience Question: I took the birth control pill for 30 years, started at 16 and have been on HRT for three years am I doomed?

JRL: You've really increased your risk. You are not necessarily doomed but what you have got to do is correct everything now and stop it before cells get out of hand. Birth control pills when given to littlekids like 8 years and 10 years and 12 year old kids are getting it because they show up with acne or they show up with rashes here an there. And there are doctors out there who give these little kids birth control pills and it increases their ultimate risk of breast cancer by over 65% and this is a study done by the National Cancer Institute. 2#39:47

Now if you are 26 years old and you are sleeping with somebody you hope to marry and you don't want to have kids right away a couple of years of birth control pills don't seem to hurt you. However if you get up around five years of it the chances are when you go off you have a good chance of never having another period, it is called secondary hypo-gonadism, because all of a sudden your ovaries have been out of the loop.

When you take birth control pills your own ovaries don't do anything. Doesn't do any good at all. If you were to be given progesterone it wouldn't help because the drugs used in the birth control pills are totally foreign to your body. 2#40:23

There was a question here, "the doses are so tiny how can they hurt you?" It is not that the doses are tiny the doses are tiny because it can't get out of you so it just keeps working and working. We don't have the mechanical, the metabolic tools to rid our body of these foreign things. So they are very potent but that's why they are a small dose but they are still potent and you shouldn’t have them.

I think there is a slight risk the longer you use birth control pills the more likely you are never to have normal ovaries again. Which means more likely you are always to be progesterone deficient and since we live in an oestrogen dominated world you increase your risk. 2#41:04

I don't think it should be done, some how there has to be a better way for that but it is not the big risk that a lot of people claim except for the very young girls.

So I think you should get off your HRT and should do a saliva test an d you will find that you are deficient in progesterone and depends how much body weight you have. You may not need any oestrogen at all, all you may need is a little bit progesterone. And you might need testosterone so as long as you are having the saliva test you should test for testosterone too. 2#41:39

Audience Question: Which hormones to test for and how is it decided?

JRL: Prior to doing these tests. See we have learned a lot over the last twenty years. Fortunately when we write new books we try to incorporate what we learn but we never have to undo what we said before which is the good thing. We can just write a new book and move on and so we have done this through five books but we have learned for instance that testosterone deficiency is much more common than normally thought. And so we are recommending to people that they do more testosterone testing. And it turns out that being low in testosterone is very important. When you are low in testosterone don't have much energy, can't handle problems very well, you are depressed most of the time, you have no libido and you don't know what's wrong. It's very frustrating and they will go to their doctor with this list of complaints, the last thing in his mind is to look for testosterone and that's the only thing they need. 2#42:36

And a woman, a beautiful study was in the New England Journal of Medicine October three years ago from Massachusetts General Hospital where they train Harvard doctors. They had women like this and somebody said, "Oh lets look and see what their testosterone is.” Then, they discovered that the routine blood test is useless for this so they eventually got around to testing for the free hormone. They found these women that had about thirty of them were low in the real testosterone so they gave four different doses. They gave a quarter milligram, a half milligram, a full milligram and two milligrams a day as a cream. Taking it by mouth doesn't work, taking it by shot is old fashioned and no good painful, the thing is rub it on. So they gave them four doses and they found that the lowest does was just as good as the highest dose 2#43:25

All of these women within a few weeks were back to normal good health. A quarter milligram, a tiny little bit by cream raised their testosterone level five fold.

So men need 1 or two milligrams women need a fourth of a milligram to half a milligram of testosterone and it will bring it back to normal. And that's the whole purpose we are not treating someone, we are not trying to raise the level into some unusual range. We want just back to the level of healthy people 2#43:55

Audience Question: If a cancer tumour is both progesterone and oestrogen receptor positive should you use progesterone cream?

JRL:A good question, you must understand how the words are carefully written. At the tumour was oestrogen positive and progesterone positive. What was positive there, I mean what were they measuring? Do you have any idea?

They were measuring to see if the tissue had receptors. If you had receptors for these hormones you are receptor positive. If they search the cell or material and they can't find any receptor then call it receptor negative. The receptor is merely the thing that the cell needs so that it can hear the message of the hormone, right.

So if you don't have any progesterone receptors you can't hear any progesterone message. Correct? If you don't have a phone you are going to get a phone call. Correct? That what it is necessary for. If you don't have any progesterone receptors you cannot hear the progesterone message. You want the progesterone message. The progesterone message to the cells is don't multiply, don't grow more, don't go through this hyperplasia business with me, don't turn into cancers. Stop what you are doing. That's the message of progesterone. 2#45:12

The message of oestrogen to the cells is to multiply, to grow, make more of yourselves, spread through the body become cancer make, kill the lady, that's the message of oestrogen 2#45:24

So you don't want to help that message, so when you find that you are progesterone receptor negative that means giving you progesterone is not going to help your life at all. Now fortunately, the tests are wrong so often don't pay any attention to it. You are on the progesterone anyway. The other thing you need to know about this is the thing that makes the progesterone receptor is oestrogen. 2#45:51

The more oestrogen dominant you are the more progesterone receptors you need. The body wants to hear the message of progesterone. The body is trying to set up receptors so no matter where the message came from they'll catch it. So high levels of progesterone receptors means that your body wants progesterone. You need it because it is made by excess oestrogen, that is what makes excess progesterone receptors and the doctors don't understand a bit of this. When you explain it to your doctor be kind, realise that they are so far off the beam they have a hard time understanding this 2#46:30

Doing the test is one thing, interpreting the test is another they all interpret it wrong. They will say, ”Oh my God she got a bunch of progesterone receptors. We’d better not give her any progesterone.” 2#246:44

No this is just a sign of oestrogen dominance, that's the lady who can benefit. When Doctor Zava did his study of three thousand women. One of them was a lady who did have the proper amount of progesterone and she died of her breast cancer, that one.

And on further study they found that her body was unable to make progesterone receptors. So even though she had the right amount of progesterone her cells could not get the message. She was sixteen when she got her cancer and she died in six weeks 2#47:14

There is no treatment that could help her, she’s going to going down hill and going to die because she makes oestrogen. There’s no way to stop it, ‘cause she has no progesterone receptors and so she died. 2#47:24

Do you follow what happened there? This is not so tough and fortunately this business of not being able to make a progesterone receptor is very, very rare and for some reason that gene to do that was lost. So oestrogen could not stimulate the cell to make a progesterone receptor. So therefore when she got her cancer she’s dead.

So yes your doctor, that doctor should give you the progesterone because if you have a lot of progesterone receptors it merely means that you are oestrogen dominant.

Audience Question: Can you talk a little bit about the difference between sub-lingual progesterone and transdermal? 2#47:59

JRL: We have done tests on this. If you take sub-lingual oil drops or a lozenge of some sort or whatever they call it "?putatrosh?" if they put it in your cheek the absorption from oil to put in your cheek the absorption takes place in 15 minutes. It's all absorbed so it is wonderful for aborting a migraine headache, but it is stupid to use if you are trying to restore hormone order in anybody's body because you get this high spike in 15 minutes and in 90 minutes it's all gone. It's cleared through the liver, it's gone out through the kidneys. It's gone so for 22 hours of the day you have no progesterone. What you want is slow absorption over this long period of time and the cream is the best thing we have got for that.

I'll be very happy if some one were to make a little patch that you could put on. Like the estrodiol patches that have it go in say surges every three or four hours or something, that would be ideal. But the best we have right now is a regular cream. You get one surge but it takes 24 hours to go out so you have got pretty good coverage. Or you could do alf doses twice a day, you are free to experiment with this it can't hurt you.

I don't like drops except they were advantageous for people who had migraines, it is the perfect way to abort a migraine. 2#49:14

Audience Question: I have taken Fosamax for 3 years now the doctors say Ihave osteopinae not osteoporosis is this false?

JRL: There are so many of these scams going on in that question it is hard to explain. Osteopinae is the chicken way of saying, “Gee your bones aren't as strong as I think they ought to be.” It is just like anemia means your blood count isn't as quite as high as it ought to be. The "emia" part means we think it isn't as high as it ought to be. 2#49:46

And then if it gets a little bit higher they call it osteoporosis. And they have these guidelines if it is a certain bone mineral density then it is osteoporosis and if it's a little above that it's not. That's like saying that if you are three months pregnant but we can't hear the heart beat then you are not pregnant. But at four months we can hear the heart beat now you're pregnant. So it is as stupid as that. 2#50:11

You should think of osteoporosis as a process. The process starts when you are 35. All studies show that women, their peak bone mass occurs around age 35. And after age 35 they start losing bone. They lose bone at 1 to 1.5% per year and then at menopause they lose it at 4 to 5% per year for 2 or 3 years then it reverts back to 1% per year after that. 2#50:35

So osteoporosis starts when you are 35. You are obviously in the safe range but every year they test it's lower than it was before so there is something going on. That something going on is osteoporosis. Coincides exactly with the fact most women start losing progesterone at age 35. They are still making all the oestrogen they always did. They have all these periods so this loss is not due to oestrogen. There is no sign that this is due to oestrogen deficiency is the cause of osteoporosis. All the signs say that it is progesterone and testosterone deficiency and bad diet and lack of exercise. There is no study that shows that oestrogen is good for bones.

Oestrogen slows up bone loss but it does nothing for new bone formation. It is the dumbest thing in the world to treat and that why it doesn't work if you just give oestrogen. You have to build new bone up to restore it. 2#51:30

So at any rate they use these funny words. Now the way that the scam comes in is that 10 years ago the level that was called osteoporosis was at a certain place. And now they have lowered it so that many more women are now called osteoporosis because they want you into treatment. They want to give you Fosamax, they want to give you all this stuff, they want to do all these tests, want to make all this money so they just lowered the level. And so it is easier for and now the poor radiologists say now you are in the level and now we can call it osteoporosis. 2#52:02

Well it turns out that the way these tests work. It's a beam of energy that is shone through you. It could be light, it could be X-ray. It could be radon it could be various things, photons. They shine a beam through you and if the beam particles hit particles of mineral they bounce off. So the beam that gets all the way through is the beam energy didn't hit anything. So the more mineral there is in the path of the beam the greater will be the drop in the energy when it comes out the other side of the body of the beam. Do you all follow that?

It is like shining a flash light through a light handkerchief and than a blanket and then a thicker one and pretty soon none of the light comes from the other side. So you can tell, you can call that a density of something that prevents the beam going through. 2#52:51

Well it is perfectly obvious that if you have a woman who weighs 180lbs and chops wood for a living she is probably going to have very big, tough, strong bones. If she is 80lbs and very petite and doesn't do much exercise her bones might be just fine for her weight, but being a smaller bone there is a smaller passage to traverse. The traverse of the beam through the bone is a smaller area and so therefore you will get smaller numbers. In the class I taught I used to use the idea of Sweden, my grandparents were from Sweden. And I'd say,” Pretend there was an area in Sweden you had one drunk Swede for every mile.” And someone comes back and says, "I went down that road and I saw 5 drunks Swedes."

The other one says, "Well I went down the same day and I found 10 drunk Swedes."

So he says. "How far did you go? I went 5 miles." The other guy, "I went 10 miles." It depends how far the traverse is, right the same thing with the bones. If you get someone with big bones the traverse is big, if they have little bones the traverse is small. They get different numbers, so all those little people are told they have osteoporosis and they don't. And all the big people they say well you're bones OK but not very good. But they are large they should have bigger bone mineral densities. The doctors are misdiagnosing osteoporosis, not everybody needs these hormones, the people have enough. Exercise can do so much, the right diet can do so much. But if you have the problem and you do have a declining bone mineral density it is very likely you need progesterone or testosterone or both to restore new bone formation. Oestrogen does nothing for new bone formation. 2#54:22

At any rate it's part of another scam. There is a wonderful book out about the supposed osteoporosis epidemic. The epidemic occurred because they lowered the guidelines for diagnosing osteoporosis, they made more of you have osteoporosis than you really do.

Audience Question: If I feel Tamoxifen is effective in preventing breast cancer should I take progesterone cream? 2#54:46

JRL: The two are not connected at all. Tamoxifen is supposed to interfere with the receptor sites for oestrogen in the breast. Unfortunately it is oestrogenic in the uterus, and causes, it is a cancer causing drug. And almost all countries have abandoned this, it has been out for 26 years. It has never been proven to have any beneficial effect on anybody, in preventing breast cancer. There is no study that shows that. They all show no effect and bad effects so most doctors refuse to prescribe it after 2 or 3 years. 100% of doctors refuse to prescribe it after 5 years because after that the side effects begin showing up, trokes, cancers and so on. I have never used it in my practice at all. However progesterone is protective against breast cancer. Period, it tells the genes in those cells to not make cancer cells out of hemselves. Has no relation to Tamoxifen. Don't ever put them in the same sentence again. 2#55:45

Progesterone is beneficial, all studies show that it helps prevent breast cells to turn into cancer cells that's your goal. You don't want normal breast cells to become cancer cells. So you can do the progesterone get it be 200 - 300 times greater than your estrodiol and that?s as good as you can get. There is no better treatment. 2#56:08

Audience Question: Is DCIS, multi-ductal cancer or not?

JRL: DCIS, that's ductal carcinoma in situ we talked about that. If it's in situ it means there is a funny cell scattered here and there through the field when they look through the microscope. There is no big cluster of cells altogether that's why it could never be felt, there is no lump. You'll never find it that way. They find it by finding micro-calcifications which are the result of a long battle between 2 competing forces in the life of your breast cells. And so there is no edges to this, it is not a tumour. Now there are some that the pathologists will look at it and say , "Whoa, these cells are growing right through various walls, various ducts, various muscles cells, tissue lines. 2#56:57

They are invasive, they are moving that's the one you should have a mastectomy on. The other one is just get your hormones in balance that's the end of it you won't have any more problems. So it is nice to have a biopsy and if it shows invasive cancer no matter what else they call it. It probably should result in a mastectomy, but then you must correct the underlying metabolic imbalance or else it will show up. There is no edge to the tumour, there is no tumour there is no way they can ever say it is completely removed. So the vast majority are just simple DCIS, ductal carcinoma in situ. They do not need to be treated except by getting your hormone balance back and then you have solved the underlying metabolic imbalance and therefore they won't do anything 2#57:46

Audience Question: Now that ?Psion? is saying that DCIS, is pre-cancerous?

JRL: You see humans are not rational animals. Humans are rationalising animals. He calls it a pre-cancer because when he finds these and doesn't treat them one or two down the line will show up with ancer later I just mentioned that. You understand what I just said? if you find that they are invasive then that's the ones to be treated. the ones that are not invasive they are not any danger it is not pre-cancerous it's not anything it's just that in his rationality, his rationalisation he hinks it is step and that the next step is unavoidable. The next step is avoidable, don't take that next step get your hormones in balance and that's it. 2#58:29

See treating the body is like doing something to a black box. Someone has got a black box and had got all these gauges, handles and knobs and whistles and everything on there. You do something, you put in something you stand back and you watch. And then from whatever happens you make up a theory to explain what happened in the black box. But you don't know that theory is right or wrong. You need more information about it. Doctors make up these theories and if the theory makes money the theory stays in place. 2#58:58

Audience Question: How do I get off HRT, what is the best procedure?

JRL: Well what I tell people, "Don't panic, first you should get a saliva hormone level and see how bad the situation is. And you'll find that your estrodiol is away too high, your progesterone is practically zero because the doctor hasn't been giving you any. I had one lady in Canada send me 10lbs of her medical records. She said she'd seen 5 different doctors she tried everything and still feels terrible. And I saw that she was taking Provera, which is in the "pro! part of Prempro. And the doctor kept giving her more and more Provera and then he would have a lab test to see what her progesterone level was and each case it was still close to zero. And he would give more and he created all these illnesses in this poor lady. Provera is a terrible drug, it causes all sorts of iver problems, strokes and everything else Finally the lab tech wrote on the last one, "Doctor you are giving this lady Provera, you are asking me to check for progesterone. Provera is not Progesterone." The lab tech knew.

So at any rate what you do is, usually end up cutting you oestrogen in half and you got to throw away Prempro because you can't separate the 2 ingredients. Because you want to stop, throw away the Provera part completely. So then you can get some progesterone and you start with 12-15 milligrams a day and then you wait 3 months and do another saliva test and then if your estrodiol is still to high you bring that own another notch. And if for the progesterone you need more or giving too much you can make that adjustment and in the next six months you have got everything in order. You don't have too much estrodiol, you have got the right balance between the two and you never have to worry about it again. Nothing to it. 2#60:55

Normally the women find that they don't really need any oestrogen at all. By age 80 65% of women are still making all the oestrogen they need. And it will show up in the saliva test. And they'll show that the doctor was giving you oestrogen that you didn't even need it. So if you find that you don't need any that's fine. But if you find that you need a little bit that's OK as long as it is covered with the progesterone. So it is not a dilemma, it is not a problem. 2#61:21

Some people ask questions about phyto-oestrogens. Do you all know what phyto-oestrogens are? They are oestrogenic materials that are found in plants, that's what phyto-oestrogen means. However this oestrogenic material has no relation to the hormones that we are talking about. They do tend to occupy oestrogen receptors, and they have a very weak action. They are 200 times weaker than the weakest oestrogen your body makes. They are very weak but for some people just occupying the oestrogen receptors helps them with hot flushes, so I don't mind people trying these herbs and things. That Black Cohosh and all these I don't mind you trying. People have tried them for the past 6000 years and in some people they seem to help, but it is a minority of people.

MC: Thank you again Doctor Lee we greatly appreciate ... 2#62:08

# # #