Does Germ X cause cancer

Does Germ X cause cancer

http://www.chacha.com/question/does-germ-x-cause-cancer

Germ-X knows how important good health is to you and your family. There is no record of it causing cancer.

Is cancer caused by a germ?

http://www.yojna.org/cancfaq.htm

There is no scientific evidence that cancer is caused by a germ.

Do germs cause cancer ?

http://www.indorecancerfoundation.org/faq.htm#do_germs

Many researchers believe that some viruses may play an important role in causing cancer. Specific epidemiological data is available for nasopharyngeal and cervical cancers.

Related Questions Answered on Y!Answers

My boyfriend TB skin test came back positive. He went to the hospital and they ran extensive test on him.?

Q: Well first off before he went to the hospital he went back to his doctor who prescribed him INH (Isoniazid) for 6 months because again his TB skin test came back positive. He was on his 5th day taking the medication when the disease infectious doctor and other doctor at the hospital told him to stop taking it because all of the tests which were chest x ray, sputum test, blood tests and catscan x-ray all came back negative. Meaning end result he has “INACTIVE TB” Now they told him that when he went back to his primary doctor he will decide whether or not he would have my boyfriend continue with the INH for 6 months. So he went and the doctor told him that he does not need to take it. Now it is to my understanding that if you stop taking the medication the germs can become resitant to the drug and not work. But I am assuming that the doctors know best and would not do that. I am assuming that 5 days of taking INH will not cause damage. I would assume that he would have to be on it for weeks or months for the germs to become resistant. I am planning on spending the rest of my life with him that is why I am so concerned. So my questions are 1.) Should he have continued the drug.??..he was only taking it for 5 days. Will that cause the germs to be resistant to INH or is was it to early in the game for that to happen since again he was only took it for 5 days or not??? Should he consider going back on it or not? How weak/severe must his immune system need to be compromised for TB to possibly become active?? I heard people live their whole entire life inactive tb not becoming active. I heard that HIV, Cancer or other sever illness can cause inactive tb to become active. Can a simple flu or cold do the trick or they are not damaging enough?Last time he took a TB skin test was in highschool. He is now 31 and extremely healthy. So he must have gotten the germs within a 13-14yr time frame. He is very fit and active. He also begun to eat super healthy. Fruits, vegetables, salads tons of water, vitamins, wheat grass to keep that immune system strong and healhty. He scared and notice a change in him. I know he’s doing everything possible to stay super healthy. I am worried for my safety. I know as long as its inactive you can’t spread TB but what happens if it becomes active and he does not know it and spreads the germs to me and family.

A: About 1/3 of the human race are carrying TB, about 90% never have it reactivated. The immune system needs to be quite seriously suppressed, for example by specific drugs for organ transplants or HIV infection (not flu etc.)That risk has to be weighed against the risks of 6 months on isoniazid. You could ask the doctor to explain why they thought it was the best option.

“Isn’t animal testing responsible for every major medical advance?”?

Q: http://www.stopanimaltests.com/Medical historians have shown that improved nutrition and sanitation standards and other behavioral and environmental factors—rather than knowledge gained from animal experiments—are responsible for the decreasing number of deaths from common infectious diseases since 1900 and that medicine has had little to do with increased life expectancy. Many of the most important advances in the field of health care can be attributed to human studies, which have led to major medical breakthroughs, such as the development of anesthesia, the stethoscope, morphine, radium, penicillin, artificial respiration, x-rays, antiseptics, and CAT, MRI, and PET scans; the study of bacteriology and germ theory; the discovery of the link between cholesterol and heart disease and the link between smoking and cancer; and the isolation of the virus that causes AIDS. Animal testing played no role in these or many other important medical developments.%3A//www.peta.org.uk/

A: Animal testing is responsible for Thalidomide – the drug that caused many many babies to be born without limbs such as arms and legs. It proved that testing drugs on animals does not make them safe for humans as humans are different genetically. More recently, other drugs that had been tested on animals were used in England on humans, and those that took it ended up on life support machines.Testing on animals is cruel, unnecessary and ineffective. It relies on human ignorance – the ignorance of the general public who assume that it must be beneficial. It is only sustained because of the amount of money that the testing companies make from it.They should be concentrating on human stem cell and genes testing where no one is cruelly treated, animal or human, and results have been very encouraging.Let’s get rid of animal cruelty altogether – the only people it benefits are the ones that make money from it.