Most of you know me: decades ahead of the pack (mainly because the medical pack is disappearing up its own a**!)
For years I have been writing about my 3 principles of anti-cancer health:
Rule #1. Any good health measure is an anti-cancer measure!
Rule #2. Any good health measure is an anti-cancer measure!
Rule #3. Any good health measure is an anti-cancer measure!
No kidding: this is writ LARGE in my famous anti-cancer book CANCER RESEARCH SECRETS. Truth is, it’s simply not possible to separate cancer tendencies from general health issues.
In fact I have 3 easy-to-remember pillars of health:
1. Diet and nutrition
2. Chemical unburdening
3. Emotional detox
4. (these days I would add EMFs)
As usual, the medical profession as a whole eventually catches up with what I am telling you about! And so it is again. They have decided that “comorbidities” (other health conditions) have a profound influence on cancer vulnerability! So what I have known for decades is gradually creeping into the orthodox medical canon (as it must).
CANCER DOES NOT JUST HAPPEN! It does not drop out of the sky into your poor innocent body! Cancer is a signal that your general health is a wreck! As I have written often, cancer is not a death sentence. BUT IT IS A WAKE-UP CALL. You better listen, or else!
Face it, cancer is not a challenge that any of us want to face. It’s scary. Treatment is questionable, to say the least. Indeed, I have suspected that most people die of cancer treatment, not the disease!
[Ooops, am I allowed to say that? Oh yes, RFK is in there, fighting for the truth! Haha!]
The statistics are pretty grim. One in every two men and nearly that many women will get cancer at some stage in their life. 50/50 chance! Meaning you or a loved will almost certainly contract the disease. In effect, it means that we are all fighting cancer. An unpleasant thought.
BUT WE ARE NOT HELPLESS. General health is a gift and open to you to claim. If you already have heart disease, diabetes, you’re obese, gut issues, fatty liver or indeed if you are taking meds for any reason, then you have left things a bit late! But still, you can put that into reverse. If you don’t do that you’re back to 50/50 (the toss of a coin in effect) that the Big C will come visiting you.
Now there is a new study to put even more figures around this issue and maybe it will help you be mindful of the risks of doing “nothing”. [Of course nobody is doing nothing. The majority of citizens are daily dosing themselves with death in what they eat and drink—not you of course, dear reader! But they believe, or are told, that exercize and nutrition are irrelevant to their health]
It is clear that there is a strong correlation between existing health conditions (so-called comorbidities) and the likelihood of cancer, meaning specific risks for specific types of cancer. The study came from the prospective Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) screening trial.
For purposes of the current study, comorbidities were classified into five specific combinations: cardiovascular conditions (coronary heart disease or heart attack, stroke, and hypertension); gastrointestinal conditions (ulcerative colitis, Crohn’s disease, diverticulitis or diverticulosis, etc. and gallbladder stones or inflammation); respiratory conditions (chronic bronchitis or emphysema); liver conditions (hepatitis or cirrhosis); and metabolic conditions (obesity and type 2 diabetes).
Among nearly 130,000 participants without a history of cancer, the risk of any incident cancer was significantly higher for adults with a history of respiratory and cardiovascular conditions. Not so with gastrointestinal, liver, and metabolic disease. However, it was a complex multiple risk assessment meaning, for example, there was a very definite link between a history of liver conditions and risk of liver cancer, but otherwise liver conditions were associated with a significantly REDUCED risk of endometrial cancer (womb lining).
Meanwhile, metabolic conditions (obesity and type 2 diabetes) were associated with an increased risk of liver, endometrial, kidney, biliary, thyroid, rectal, colon, pancreas, and hematopoietic cancers (leukemias), with a DECREASED risk of melanoma, lung, head and neck, and prostate cancers.
“The strong positive associations together with the high global prevalence of obesity and type 2 diabetes further underscores the public health importance of efforts to curtail these conditions,” was the obvious conclusion.
Additionally, cardiovascular conditions were associated with an increased risk of four cancers: prostate, biliary, upper gastrointestinal, and kidney. Plus a DECREASED RISK of breast cancer.
Gastrointestinal conditions were also associated with an increased risk of four cancers: thyroid, breast, kidney, and ovarian and AGAIN, a decreased risk of prostate cancer, while respiratory conditions were associated with an INCREASED risk of lung and pancreatic cancers, and a REDUCED risk of prostate cancer.
Quite a complicated picture, as you will see. But little comfort. If you are a man and at risk of demise from lung cancer, it is hardly reassuring to think “Well, at least I won’t get prostate cancer!” Doesn’t really work, does it?
In fact only one position “works”, which is to do your very best to remain in good health overall.
And let’s not be coy; I’m talking also about death here.
For individual cancer types, metabolic conditions mean you are more likely to die following a diagnosis of endometrial cancer, upper gastrointestinal cancer, and leukemias, and prostate cancer, while cardiovascular conditions were associated with a higher hazard of death following a diagnosis of leukemia-type cancers and lung cancer.
[I have used the word leukemias here, to simplify. There are of course several leukemias but there are other “cancers” of blood, bone marrow, lymph, and lymphatic system, such as Hodgkin’s, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and multiple myeloma.
Having assembled all this good data, the authors of the study appear to have then turned daft and hypothesized that the reason for the higher-risk connections is that not enough of the right “treatment” (suboptimal was their word) was used to combat the cancers, because of concern over the patient’s overall health!
What? Death by cancer is NOT a deficiency of chemo or radiation, we all know that. It’s lack of health!
But then, thank goodness, they slip in that these results create a strong concern for “individualized primary prevention among individuals.” That is correct and is the ONLY way to do battle with the Big C. It’s back to my dictum: any good health measure is an anti-cancer measure.
And nothing I have written here overrides my main teaching, which is that YOU are responsible for your own health and cancer risk. To leave it to the medical profession has the same outcome as suicide!
To your good health,
Prof. Keith Scott-Mumby
The Official Alternative Doctor
Source Reference:
Lavery JA, et al “Comorbidity in midlife and cancer outcomes” JAMA Netw Open 2025; DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.3469.
Secondary Source
Koroukian SM, et al “Moving closer to personalized cancer prevention strategies by assessing comorbidity and multimorbidity” JAMA Netw Open 2025; DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.3476.
