Username: Password:

My Forum Quick Questions X

Sorry this feature is for members only.


SELECT A FORUM BY CLICKING ONE OF THE FORUM ICONS BELOW


Cureality Diet

Cureality Exercise

Bone Health

Heart Health

Thyroid Health

Diabetes / Pre-diabetes

Weight Loss

High Blood Pressure

Atrial Fibrillation

Skin Health

Digestive Health

Autoimmunity
Cureality Proficiency Certifications and Awards X

This forum, including much of its vast wealth of knowledge, thousands of pages of special reports, custom tracking programs, supplement discounts, and many other features are available only to our members.

Becoming a member will allow you to view replies, make posts, and will remove the product advertising from this forum.


Member Forum >> Cureality Diet General Discussion >> Ruminations on Cancer
 Ruminations on Cancer
Bob Niland

No Avatar

Join Date: 7/7/2014
Posts Contributed: 2680
Post Likes: 406
Recommends Recd: 3
Ignores Issued: 0
Certs & Awards: 39   view

Post Likes: 0
 
Posted: 2/11/2016 8:32:26 AM
Edited: 2/18/2017 7:58:22 PM (22)
 
Ruminations on Cancer

Ruminations on Cancer

Edition: 2017-02-18

Table of Contents

Introduction
Metabolic Theories
Plan A: Avoidance
  Low Glucose Diet : Low Trigger Diet : Key Micronutrients : Multiple Sun Issues : Environmental Triggers
Treatment Options
  Remediate Diet : Do Homework : Engage Collaborative Provider : Don't Dismiss SoC : FMT Contingency Plan : Ketogenic Diet : R-KD, Exogenous Ketones : Hyperbarics and Other Options
If the Afflicted isn't You
Addendum: Mitigating Non-Native EMF

Introduction

Nixon declared War on Cancer in 1971. Presidents since then have made various symbolic gestures, with another pricey proposal mooted as I was initially assembling this article. A very few cancers do have effective treatments, but most do not. What we primarily have to show for the investment over the last 45 years is some pretty nifty gene analysis technology that's of huge value for other reasons.

The overall cancer rates and mortality (net of “all sites”) is reportedly unchanged since 1950. Finding data and charts for that is not trivial, because prominently reporting it apparently supports no one's agenda (or funding model). You can easily find charts showing a slight decrease trend since 1990, but this appears to be mostly due to a decline in smoking.

Why so little net progress? Well, as with many chronic non-infectious ailments, the cure may be illusive because they are almost certainly digging in the wrong place. The main impediment in cancer research is probably the dominant somatic (or gene) theory of cancer, memorialized in the book Emperor of All Maladies (Mukherjee, 2001) which purported to be “A Biography of Cancer”, but neglected to mention Otto Warburg, even if to dismiss him. See Tripping Over the Truth: The Return of the Metabolic Theory of Cancer Illuminates a New and Hopeful Path to a Cure (Christofferson, 2014).

A few cancers have a predictable genetic etiology, but most express genetic chaos, which chaos is not amenable to the long promised genetic or gene-targeting therapies.

The number of cancer risk factors is growing rapidly. All sorts of correlations, which may or may not identify causes, have been found. The California Proposition 65 list is perhaps the most well-known, although it notoriously fails to include sugar. The list itself is probably carcinogenic by now.

So the risk of getting cancer appears to remain high, and once diagnosed, the outcomes in most cases, under the Standard of Care (SoC; the consensus treatments) remain discouraging: expensive, unpleasant, and offering average life extension often measured in mere days or weeks.

There are isolated human cultures today that have no or very little cancer.
What makes them different?

It is thought that Western culture had a dramatically lower risk of cancer until fairly recently.
What changed?

The answer in both case is:
a lot
How many of those changes matter?
It could be most of them. Return to TOC ]

Metabolic Theories

So if the somatic theory is incorrect, what theories might we consider that offer some testable possibilities for prevention, treatment or cure? The number of alternative theories over the last few decades has ranged from credible to crackpot.

Perhaps the most prominent of the credible alternate theories is the metabolic, originally proposed by Warburg in the 1920s, and more recently revised by Seyfried, who wrote a book about it “Cancer as a Metabolic Disease“ (2012). It's an expensive textbook, but here's an open summary from 2014:
Cancer as a metabolic disease: implications for novel therapeutics
Basically, anything that causes mitochondrial impairment can lead to cancer in a metabolism predisposed to enable it.

There are variations of that theory that are also based on mitochondrial dysfunction, for example Seneff. Prevention and treatment approaches may be similar on that view. There's also a Tissue Organization Field Theory, an Atavistic Model and Jack Kruse seems to have his own “mitonuclear asynchronous disease” theory, which I haven't dug into.

The Warburg effect, by the way, suggests a reason why cancer researchers may be unwilling to look more seriously at the metabolic theories. The role of glucose amounts to an indictment of consensus full-time glycemic diets. Any researcher proposing to prevent or treat cancer by means of reduced glucose is declaring that the USDA and DGA committees have been telling people to eat cancer food for decades. That further leads to heart disease dogma being upside down as well. Anyone seeking NIH funding is probably seriously disinclined to open those cans of worms. Return to TOC ]

Plan A: Avoidance

There may presently be no “cure” for the majority of cancers. Most of them may turn out to be a largely expected biologic response to various provocations in too-common metabolic scenarios. Our bodies may be deflecting these hazards most of the time. If a site gets out of control, taking extraordinary consensus steps to kill it may leave us weakened for the next routine episode.

The main thing to do about cancer is to reduce your profile as a target:

  1. Adopt a very low net carb diet.
  2. Eliminate or reduce known triggers in diet.
  3. Attend to protective micronutrients in diet.
  4. Obey the sun.
  5. Reduce exposure to known environmental triggers.

Return to TOC ]

1. Low Glucose Diet

A key feature of the metabolic theory of cancer is the “Warburg Effect” (described in the Seyfried paper linked earlier). Tumors thrive on glucose. Mainstream oncologists use this to image tumors with tagged glucose (PET scan). Why consensus oncologists don't exploit it for treatment may be an impolite question.

There are a of videos available on ketogenic diet, and a possible role for it in cancer, circa early 2016. If you only take in one (about a half hour), it might be this one by Adrienne C. Scheck, PhD on ketogenic diet as an adjunct to Standard of Care.

Tumors can get by on glutamine. They do poorly or die on ketone bodies. A diet that is 50 grams net carb per day is at what is generally considered to be the glycemic/ketotic borderline. Following Cureality or Wheat Belly, you are apt to be in ketosis at least part of the time. On the metabolic theory, this is unfriendly to tumors (but probably not inherently therapeutic).

Tumors apparently can also do well on linoleic (LA) and arachidonic (ARA) acids, both Omega 6 PUFAs. Of these, the ω6LA is pervasive in modern so-called “vegetable” oils derived from grains and other seeds. ω6LA is also inflammatory. ω6LA is persistent in the body (can be stored for years), and released during weight loss “Polyunsaturated fatty acids are released more rapidly than saturated fatty acids during long-term energy deficits.”. Message: lose the weight before you get cancer (“But the 4 people that had worst progression of disease were also the heaviest with BMIs of 28-31.”)

This does not lead to a conclusion of don't do KD. Keeping the weight on is apt to be even riskier. What it really means is that anyone concerned about cancer avoidance needs to lose the weight now, and not after diagnosis. Return to TOC ]

2. Low Trigger Diet

Some elements common in modern diet are known to have a cancer connection, such as trans fats, AGEs and nitrites (including nitrosamine). The Cureality and Wheat Belly dietary guidelines warn about those (as do many cancer authorities).

Avoiding mitochondrial antagonists would appear to be an exploitable strategy on the metabolic cancer model. This means minimizing, avoiding, and if unavoidable, countering antibiotics, and food-like substances that act like antibiotics. Mitochondria are thought to be co-opted bacteria, so anything that suppresses or kills bacteria could be a problem.

Cureality and Wheat Belly further warn about common foods that enable inflammation. This includes the gluten-bearing grains, principally wheat, and modern Omega 6 PUFA industrial seed oils, mainly LA.

Wheat, in addition to being a direct gut antagonist, also opens the tight junctions of the gut wall, which allows its own adverse proteins and random other toxins into the bloodstream that should not be there. Mitochondrial mischief is a likely consequence, if not direct intestinal cancers. More? Wheat germ oil is 55% ω6LA. Return to TOC ]

3. Key Micronutrients

Immune system support is key in avoiding cancer. Cureality and Wheat Belly strongly encourage daily consumption of varied prebiotic fibers, supporting a robust microbiome, a major player in immunity. Immune therapy, by the way, is an area of active research in cancer. This recent article lays out some of the benefits, hazards and sobering unknowns of direct intervention with the immune system.

Intake of 3 grams or more per day of Omega 3 DHA and EPA is advised, as well as ample potassium, both of which have been shown to be cancer protective.

Ad libitum consumption of fresh non-starchy vegetables is also encouraged, which provide cancer-protective phytonutrients in addition to prebiotic fiber. Return to TOC ]

4. Multiple Sun Issues

Conventional wisdom on cancer risk says: don't get too much sun. What if that's not just mistaken, but upside down?

Humans are adapted to both sunlight and the clock that the solar day represents.

Vitamin D
Cureality and Wheat Belly advocate a serum Vitamin D titer of 60 to 70 ng/ml. Vitamin D is known to be cancer-protective. The optimal/ancestral way to get D is exposure to sunlight. Most of us, alas cannot do that due to age, latitude, lifestyle, or some combination thereof, so we supplement. But get what sun you can.

The “Vitamin D Dilemma” is a long-standing issue. Based on my personal experience from switching to the Wheat Belly diet in 2011, I suspect that skin cancer risk is less a function of sun exposure than diet. Before WB, I used to sunburn easily and severely. I no longer do.

ipRGCs, uV, blue light
I have a separate article on the Blue Light at Night hazard which provides detail on this matter. Cancer is a risk for night time blue light exposure.

Concordantly, do get blue light, and even ultraviolet light exposure in the morning, just like your ancestors did. Don't wear sunglasses during the day unless you must (safety or unusually high exposure).

Obey the clock
Keep a wake/sleep schedule synchronized to the local solar day if possible. Don't stay up late, and fade the light to amber if you must stay up. Think twice about migrating to Mars with Elon.
CaloriesProper: Circadian rhythms and prostate cancer
BCR: Circadian clocks and breast cancer

Shift work is a known carcinogen. If you must put up with it, mitigate the light effects to the extent possible. Avoid all (not most, all) exposure to blue and bright white light during what is supposed to be your “night”. Sleep in a totally dark room. Get blue light exposure on arising. Return to TOC ]

4. Other Environmental Triggers

In a person on a strongly protective diet, it may turn out that many “known carcinogens” are substantially less potent, and perhaps no real threat at all. But all remain worth opportunistically minimizing on a precautionary basis, and a few might require more active steps.

Compared to extant primitive cultures, cancer in “developed” society is at extraordinary levels. There may be significant triggers at large, whose effects are lost in the noise.

Perhaps at the top of the list of suspects is non-native electromagnetic radiation (EMF). We're awash in it, and some of it may represent hazards we can do something about, short of full body grounded tinfoil moon suits.

See the addendum below for further discussion. Return to TOC ]

Treatment Options

If we are confronted with a diagnosis, how does the metabolic theory inform our therapy choices? (And it is our choice - let the oncologist advise, but not dictate.)

I have not been in this situation, but if I had to deal with it, this is what I would do… Return to TOC ]

Remediate Diet Immediately, Tweak

This tip may be effective only for cancers that show up in PET scans. This caveat apparently applies to most prostate cancers and glutamine-dependent cancers. For those that don't show up, alternatives need to be considered. Also, if a cancer develops in someone who has consistently been on a low-carb or keto diet for many years, further adjustments in diet are apt to be of very limited value, with perhaps caloric restriction being the only option there.

If I wasn't following a very-low-net-carb, grain-free, low-inflammatory, high-specific-fat, gut-attentive that is low in other suspect food-like additives, I'd consider it the first step. The Cureality and Wheat Belly recommendations cover this.

Look for additional supplements that are known to be supportive of mitochondria. Some that come to mind are CoQ10 and NAC (which latter was mentioned in a paper linked earlier).

If already on the Cureality or Wheat Belly lifestyle, I'd go even lower net carb (less than 20 grams per day). This is a ketogenic diet (KD), and it both deprives the tumors of the glucose they thrive on, and raises blood levels of ketone bodies, which other cells can run on, but tumors cannot (at least at the outset). Based on reports to date, I consider this a holding or a delay action, and not a full treatment. More tweaks below.

Drive intake of the PUFA Omega 6 linoleic acid as low as possible. ω6LA is the major component of common novel vegetable oils (refined grain and seed oils). “tumors selectively take up high amounts of polyunsaturated fatty acids”. Driving ω6LA down means learning where it hides.

In addition to reducing available glucose, take steps to prevent the remaining glucose from entering cells where it is not needed. This means minimizing insulin, and that suggests eliminating dairy, and not using substitute sweeteners known to provoke an insulin response (even if brief and mild). Return to TOC ]

Do Homework

This article is not that homework. A fundamental premise of this article is an intent to be one's own active case manager, willing to at least consider some dissident approaches.

Before I could have a productive conversation with a provider, I'd need to be conversant with the options provided under the Standard of Care for your diagnosis, and have researched what CAM (Complementary and Alternative Medicine) have to offer. A key determination for both is data on outcomes.

Part of the homework is insurance coverage. Are any CAM modalities covered? Fortunately, much of approach explored below is very inexpensive to do independently. Return to TOC ]

Find a Collaborative Provider

“Are you willing to work with a self-directed patient?” might be the first question to ask.

I would let the provider know that I'd been doing research, and will have questions, but I'd let them make their presentation.

Then I'd find out if they are open to making adjustment to the SoC, or even working with me to obtain novel or emerging CAM treatments.

If they aren't, and I couldn't find a provider who will, I'd consider to what extent I was willing to be non-compliant with any treatment I consider to be net adverse.

Many people faced with rad or chemo choose no treatment. It's tragic that they think submission to the SoC or surrender to the cancer are the only options. Return to TOC ]

Don't Dismiss the SoC

If you're going to place your bet on the Soc, you're going to get what the Soc delivers, so make sure you know what that is.

The Standard of Care has effective treatments for certain cancers. It would be crazy to ignore this option, but careful attention needs to be paid to:
• elevated risk of future/different cancers, and
• other side effects, in particular
• is loss of appetite/weight loss typical?
If the answer to that last question is “yes”, a further question must be asked: is the treatment benefit due to the treatment itself, or the incidental caloric restriction, if not actual ketosis?

I would also research any treatment adjustments for ketogenic diet. KD (ketogenic diet) appears to potentiate both radiation therapy and chemotherapy, and might allow lower dosing.

Personally, if the SoC involved chemo or rad, I'd be inclined to try a non-invasive approach first. Return to TOC ]

FMT Contingency Plan

Conventional cancer therapy is often a disaster for the gut microbiome. Consensus medicine probably pays no attention to this, or considers the gut an acceptable casualty in light of saving the greater organism. It doesn't have to be that way.

I would see if I could arrange for an autologous FMT prior to commencing any medication. This presumes that there is no suspicion that the cancer arose from a dysbiosis, of course. The FMT sample is later used to repopulate the gut with the same spectrum of micro-organisms that were there before treatment started. Probiotics, even prescription probiotics, don't really provide that.

If the medical profession wasn't supportive of FMT, I'd seriously consider a home solution, using frozen samples and enteric-coated capsules. Return to TOC ]

R-KD, IF, Exogenous Ketones

This step would require synchronizing with the latest research. Dominic D'Agostino's site is a great resource for that.

Seyfried's book suggests that a restricted-calorie ketogenic diet (R-KD or KD-R) might be an effective part of cancer therapy. The restricted aspect of it is to reduce levels of glutamine, which tumors can use instead of glucose.

Researcher Dominic D'Agostino further suggests intermittent fasting (IF) and metformin, which would be tumor stressors and BG reducers.

Exogenous ketones (ExKs) are one or more actual ketone bodies consumed as if food, rather than synthesized by the body from precursor foods like MCTs. This both raises blood ketone levels, and provides energy, which might provide more flexibility in intake of other foods. Anyone with factors that put them at higher risk for cancer probably needs to avoid casual use of ExKs. Reserve them for urgent situations.

There are few credible ExK products on the commercial market already, and a lot of useless “raspberry ketones”. The ideal products might be research materials unavailable to the general public. Getting access would probably require getting enrolled in a trial (with some risk of being in the placebo arm). Return to TOC ]

Hyperbarics and Other Options

Therapies on the metabolic theory are developing rapidly. One being investigated is hyperbaric oxygen (HbO2). Here's an eye-opening paper on a rodent trial:
PLOS|ONE: Non-Toxic Metabolic Management of Metastatic Cancer in VM Mice: Novel Combination of Ketogenic Diet, Ketone Supplementation, and Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy

Travis Christofferson may be a useful resource to track. Here's his Single Cause Single Cure site.

Other modalities are worth investigating, being sure to maintain a skeptical perspective and critical thinking. Various proposed therapies that turned up that last time I searched included IV Vitamin C (as an anti-oxidant, C may well be incompatible with HbO2), high-dose Vitamin D (not clear if it's any higher than the 60-70ng/dL titer routinely suggested by Cureality and Wheat Belly), low-dose naltrexone (LDN), mitochondria-targeting antibiotics, various supplements aimed at inhibiting angiogenesis, and the usual assortment of botanicals and nutritional potions, most of which are apt to be wishful thinking (for example: royal jelly is one - it was recently discovered that what makes queen bee honey different from regular honey is what it doesn't contain, oops).

Health skeptic Anthony Colpo (author of The Great Cholesterol Con) has suggested (on a page now behind a subscription wall) that he would look seriously at mega-dose IV Vitamin C, and perhaps iron-lowering. This approach strikes me as easily worth looking into for any cancers where the tumors are invisible to PET scan.

For prostate cancer, there was recent news on high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) treatment. That's encouraging, because in consensus treatment, outcomes often differ little between interventions and doing nothing.

Other recent developments are modified polio virus for glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) and Bacillus polyfermenticus and proteasome for multiple myeloma. Return to TOC ]

If the Afflicted is not You

They have to take command of their own situation. All you can really do is make it known that you might have some potentially life-saving advice, and are willing to share it, if the insight is sought.

Chances are this person has not been following the Cureality or Wheat Belly lifestyle, and there's also some chance you've brought that up in the past and had no luck engaging them on the topic.

Now they have an even more complicated metabolic situation, and no matter how diplomatic you are, if they consider these alternatives, they're may see it as an “I told you so” moment. Return to TOC ]

Addendum: Mitigating Non-Native EMFs

Although the RF hazard topic gets study, there are factors impeding real discovery:

  • Invested Interests™ (device makers and service providers) aren't all that keen on really knowing. They tend to run/fund trials where negation or ambiguity are the preferred conclusions, which conveniently means that they could later have a “we didn't know” defense.
  • Cell phones in particular are a moving target, both literally and metaphorically. The technology (carrier frequencies, power and modulation) change significantly with each “G” (generation), and per-call exposure varies dramatically due to geography and architecture, not to mention vehicles moving relative to towers.
  • Trial design: investigators are often primarily looking for effects from ionizing radiation, and not more subtle mitochondrial disruptions. The Wiki article on Mobile phone radiation and health lists various suspect effects.

Here are some tips on mobile electronics and WiFi. This is addition to the admonishments above on circadian disruption. Mark Sisson looked at this in June 2016, and came to similar, if slightly more permissive conclusions.

  • Keep RF emitters as far from your body as practical. For example, put the WiFi router at some central location where people don't spend a lot of time next to it.
  • Don't keep your cell phone in extended close body contact, and vary the location. I normally set mine nearby or even leave it in another room at home. This is an inverse-square-law situation. Each doubling of distance cuts the RF power by another 4x.
  • Go hands-free. Speaker-phone is fine. Or use a headset, preferably wired, preferably with an RF choke (toroid) at the plug end, more ideally acoustic (transducer at the plug end, hollow tubes to ears). Perspective: the RF risks here are to some extent conjectural. What is not conjectural is the physical risk of cell phone use while driving. Hands-free gear there is clearly lifesaving (although beaten by not taking or placing calls at all while driving).
  • Don't hold the phone to your head. I use a Motorola H720 BlueTooth headset, switched off except during calls. A BT transmitter only has to reach a typical 10 meters. A cell phone transmitter might have to reach 10 kilometers (at least 5.7 km at my house, and maybe further). As infrequently as I use a phone, I consider the BT RF risk low. Mercola has further cell tips here (that article may otherwise overstate the risk).
  • Think twice about full-time RF wearables, like smart watches, Google Glass, BlueTooth hearing aids/protectors and such. Or volunteer to be the lab rat. It's your call.

Return to TOC ]

___________
Bob Niland [disclosures] [topics]

Tags: ,Cancer




Bob Niland

No Avatar

Join Date: 7/7/2014
Posts Contributed: 2680
Post Likes: 406
Recommends Recd: 3
Certs & Awards: 39   view


Post Likes: 0
 
Posted: 2/11/2016 8:33:36 AM
Edited: 2/14/2016 10:31:04 PM (2)
 
Reply Content Hidden!

Post replies longer than 250 characters are restricted to active members.

Sign Up Today!



Tags:

Bob Niland

No Avatar

Join Date: 7/7/2014
Posts Contributed: 2680
Post Likes: 406
Recommends Recd: 3
Certs & Awards: 39   view


Post Likes: 0
 
Posted: 6/22/2016 1:27:36 PM
 
Reply Content Hidden!

Post replies longer than 250 characters are restricted to active members.

Sign Up Today!



Tags:

Boo

No Avatar

Join Date: 12/17/2009
Posts Contributed: 2151
Post Likes: 174
Recommends Recd: 6
Certs & Awards: 0   view


Post Likes: 0
 
Posted: 6/22/2016 6:40:20 PM
 
yeah, that's what Mercola was talking about during this interview.




Tags:

lindybill

No Avatar

Join Date: 7/29/2008
Posts Contributed: 5842
Post Likes: 131
Recommends Recd: 7
Certs & Awards: 0   view


Post Likes: 0
 
Posted: 6/23/2016 1:49:10 AM
 
Reply Content Hidden!

Post replies longer than 250 characters are restricted to active members.

Sign Up Today!



Tags:

Bob Niland

No Avatar

Join Date: 7/7/2014
Posts Contributed: 2680
Post Likes: 406
Recommends Recd: 3
Certs & Awards: 39   view


Post Likes: 1
 
Posted: 8/28/2016 1:27:57 PM
 
Reply Content Hidden!

Post replies longer than 250 characters are restricted to active members.

Sign Up Today!





Tags:

Boo

No Avatar

Join Date: 12/17/2009
Posts Contributed: 2151
Post Likes: 174
Recommends Recd: 6
Certs & Awards: 0   view


Post Likes: 0
 
Posted: 3/12/2017 10:56:51 AM
 
Reply Content Hidden!

Post replies longer than 250 characters are restricted to active members.

Sign Up Today!



Tags:

Bob Niland

No Avatar

Join Date: 7/7/2014
Posts Contributed: 2680
Post Likes: 406
Recommends Recd: 3
Certs & Awards: 39   view


Post Likes: 0
 
Posted: 3/12/2017 3:10:38 PM
 
Reply Content Hidden!

Post replies longer than 250 characters are restricted to active members.

Sign Up Today!



Tags: prostate cancer

Boo

No Avatar

Join Date: 12/17/2009
Posts Contributed: 2151
Post Likes: 174
Recommends Recd: 6
Certs & Awards: 0   view


Post Likes: 0
 
Posted: 3/14/2017 9:19:16 PM
Edited: 3/14/2017 10:03:23 PM (1)
 
I don't know where all of this will lead.  
You're really on your own.

47 of 53 cancer studies couldn't be reproduced.


Tags:

Bob Niland

No Avatar

Join Date: 7/7/2014
Posts Contributed: 2680
Post Likes: 406
Recommends Recd: 3
Certs & Awards: 39   view


Post Likes: 0
 
Posted: 3/19/2017 1:59:48 PM
Edited: 3/19/2017 2:06:49 PM (1)
 
Reply Content Hidden!

Post replies longer than 250 characters are restricted to active members.

Sign Up Today!



Tags:


Mission
A Message from Dr. Davis

Seeking Your Cure
Cureality Diet
Cureality Exercise
Bone Health
Heart Health
Thyroid Health
Diabetes / Pre-diabetes
Weight Loss
High Blood Pressure
Atrial Fibrillation
Skin Health
Digestive Health
Autoimmunity
Community
Forum
Library
Health Test Manager
Health Treatment Manager
Members Like Me
Dashboard
Program Tracking Tool
Community Statistics

Policies
Terms of Use
Medical Disclaimer
Report Copyright Infringement
Blog
Videos
Kitchen
Marketplace
Affiliate
Contact Us
Join Now, Get Started
Join Now

Follow Us:

 
© Copyright 2017 Cureality Powered by Cliq2 Technology