"In physiology I learned that everyone makes anywhere from 100,000 or so to 400,000 or so cancer cells A DAY." This is a common claim on alt med sites, but I've never seen evidence to back it up. The misunderstanding seems to relate to the fact that cells in the body are constantly wearing out, developing chromosomal defects etc. and are removed by normal body physiologic mechanisms - but these are not "cancer" cells until they start to divide uncontrollably and form a tumor. Your body doesn't need help from herbs to carry out its immune functions, few if any herbs have been found to enhance immunity in human beings, and if they did we'd have to be concerned about nonspecific hyperimmunity leading to autoimmune diseases. http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/cid/documents/webcontent/003042-pdf.pdf "I have known many people who went to doctor after doctor who found nothing until they were so sick they were dying. This is not uncommon, unfortunately." What is the rate of cancer detection by alternative practitioners? What early detection systems do they have to rival (for example) mammography and colonoscopy in the diagnosis of breast and colon cancers?

I am bumping this thread. I have hellebores in two areas of the garden; one with mature plants and the second in an area where I've been scattering seeds occasionally. This year, I found hundreds of babies around my mature plants. I transplanted around 300 of the babies over to the other area and now have collected seed to scatter in the same area. The new area has partial sun. We are in New England. My questions are: 1) Should I scatter the seeds, scatter and rake in lightly, or scatter and then cover with a light layer of something? I would prefer not to pot them and then have to plant them later. (Too much chance of me forgetting about them!) 2) When I see a baby ( around an inch and a half tall, with a 4" root), did that sprout from last year's seed or this year's? And as a followup, is the young plant (around 7-9 inches, with larger leaves), a 2 year old? Thanks, I do love these plants!

Paul: I'm glad you took a look at the pictures and gave some leads on what else these worms can be. I'm not entirely convinced that they are bloodworms, but I don't doubt that it's possible they are not E. fetida. If it helps, under a 60x hand lens, they are transparent except for a single red blood vessel running down the body line, and there are no visible protrusions, bristles, feet, jaws, or anything that looked different than a very small EF worm. The fish farm where I got my tillapia sells dry fish food, from powders on up to kibble, but they don't sell live food. I don't suspect that they feed their fish bloodworms with the wholesale dry stuff on hand. My system has had significant contact with soil and vermicompost though. Could these be some form of terrestrial worms that are not the EF's I deliberately put in there? If you look at the 'coosh balls' picture, you can see 2 ( I think ) small red creatures that look like tiny centipedes with poorly developed legs. Although those things worry me, I don't think they are the same creatures. The can that I took that first picture in went under aeration shortly after the picture was taken. I'll check in on it tomorrow to see what's going on. cb2: What happens if you put a drop of soap in the AVCT? Up until now, I was under the impression that it was a commonly accepted wetting agent in all sorts of garden and farm applications. I will never use it near my fish, but what about garden plants?

If I'm not mistaken, many women are now being diagnosed with cancer in old age. If every discovered non-benign cell is called Cancer, and all are treated, we can't answer a lot of questions: Are these all life-threatening cancers? Are all fast-growing? Would the person's immune system eliminate some of them? Would the person die of natural causes before the cancer caused serious damage? How much damage is done by the false positives and treatments for the 'positives'? What happened to all the women who did NOT have a cancer discovered (or treated) 'before mammography'? It's an unscientific leap to assume they all died before their time of undiscovered atypical cells in their breasts. I understand the desire to 'get it' before it becomes life limiting, but we don't know which we are seeing or what the outcome would be if it were unseen. Just because we can LOOK! LOOK! shouldn't mean we always need to CUT! CUT! I'm reminded of the adage of not consulting a surgeon if you don't want surgery. It's what they DO! Re: Pap testing. What is the rationale for this test for a woman who is not sexually active or who has only one longtime (trustworthy) partner?