Jump to content


Recommended Posts

Proton beam therapy, an advanced form of radiation treatment that can target cancer tumours with greater precision and minimise damage to surrounding tissues and organs, should be available in Singapore by the first quarter of 2023.

The Goh Cheng Liang Proton Therapy Centre at the new National Cancer Centre Singapore (NCCS) building in Outram will start operations in the first quarter of 2023. Two other centres in the private sector will also offer proton beam therapy at around the same time.

Mount Elizabeth Novena Hospital plans to offer the therapy from next February. The Singapore Institute of Advanced Medicine Holdings (SAM), a new cancer centre in Biopolis Drive, is awaiting the go-ahead from the authorities to start offering it, possibly by the end of 2022, said its chairman and chief executive officer Djeng Shih Kien.

While conventional radiotherapy uses X-rays, proton beam therapy uses positively charged subatomic particles that allow for more precise targeting of cancer cells.

This causes less damage to nearby healthy tissues and organs, which means there are fewer treatment-related side effects. The risk of developing secondary cancers due to radiation is also reduced, said Dr Soong Yoke Lim, deputy chairman and senior consultant at the radiation oncology division at NCCS.

This is why it is recommended for young patients below the age of 25, he said. The therapy is particularly suitable for cancers located in sensitive areas like the brain, or near the eye or spinal cord, for example.

Professor Robert Malyapa, director of SAM’s proton therapy centre, who has experience treating patients with the therapy in the United States, said that unlike X-rays that pass through the tumour and then exit the body, protons deposit a burst of energy at the end of their path, which is known as the Bragg peak. There is no exit dose of radiation as the proton beam stops at the tumour.



  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

why SG cholesterols test is outdated





LDL high is not harmful. LDL itself got many type. it the small ldl are are harmful

a proper cholesterols should be like this




the smaller the red ldl is the more damage it do. i talk to poly doc until they dont know how to counter me
this picture show normal LDL but depend on the type of ldl who is the damaging


you see many ppl cholesterols is useless, a proper cholesterols test then it useful

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

this show the size of ldl


the reason why big one less harmful cause the liver absorb the normal LDL which is the big one. the VLDL is the one that cannot be absorb back by the liver cause the receptor dont match (VLDL is damage)

By the way, LDL and HDL are not even cholesterols, they are carrier of cholesterol

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

in short LDL become bad cause it react to sugar (glycation), both combine into VLDL (oxidized, oxidized mean damage, liver cant take in the vldl(damage) anymore), then it stay in the body until kena inflammation then kena attack by your immune system. which cause the blood vessel to be block

that how ppl say the blood vessel got fat deposit

in short the food to avoid is sugar and a high Carb diet. Start a low carb high fat intermittent fasting diet will reduce the VLDL

LDL itself is not bad cholesterol, it bad cause of glycation as explain above . our cell even have LDL receptor for it cause our body need LDL to be deliver the cholesterol to the cell

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A common nail salon tool may cause DNA damage and mutations in human cells,




Radiation from nail dryers may damage DNA and cause cancer-causing mutations in human cells, a study has found — and that might have you wondering whether your regular gel mani-pedi is worth the risk.

Some dermatologists say the findings, in a study published in January in the journal Nature Communications, aren’t new when it comes to concerns about ultraviolet, or UV, light from any source. In fact, the results reaffirm the reason why some dermatologists have changed the way they get their gel manicures or have stopped getting them altogether.

“The findings contribute to data already published regarding the harmful effects of (ultraviolet) radiation and show direct cell death and damage to tissue that can lead to skin cancer,” said Dr. Julia Curtis, an assistant professor of dermatology at the University of Utah, who wasn’t involved in the study.

Tanning beds are listed as carcinogenic and UV nail lamps are mini tanning beds for your nails in order to cure the gel nail,” Curtis said.

  • Wahaha 1
  • wtf 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHO expected to declare artificial sweetener in Diet Coke could possibly cause cancer




LONDON - One of the world’s most common artificial sweeteners is set to be declared a possible carcinogen in July by the World Health Organisation (WHO), according to two sources with knowledge of the process, pitting it against the food industry and regulators.

Aspartame, used in products from Coca-Cola diet sodas to Mars’ Extra chewing gum and some Snapple drinks, will be listed in July as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” for the first time by WHO’s cancer research arm, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the sources said.

The IARC classification, finalised earlier in June after a meeting of the group’s external experts, is intended to reflect if something is a potential hazard or not, based on all the published evidence.

It does not take into account how much of a product a person can safely consume. This advice for individuals comes from a separate WHO expert committee on food additives, known as JECFA (the Joint WHO and Food and Agriculture Organisation’s Expert Committee on Food Additives), alongside national regulators.

However, similar IARC classifications in the past for different substances have raised concerns among consumers about their use, led to lawsuits, and pressured manufacturers to change recipes and switch to alternatives. That has led to criticism that the IARC’s assessments can be confusing to the public.

JECFA is also reviewing aspartame use this year. Its meeting began at the end of June, and it is due to announce its findings on July 14, the same day that the IARC is expected to make public its decision.


Since 1981, JECFA has said aspartame is safe to consume within accepted daily limits. For example, an adult weighing 60kg would have to drink between 12 and 36 cans of diet soda – depending on the amount of aspartame in the beverage – every day to be at risk. Its view has been widely shared by national regulators, including in the United States and Europe.


An IARC spokesman said both the agency and JECFA’s findings were confidential until July, but added that they were “complementary”.

IARC said its conclusion represented “the first fundamental step to understand carcinogenicity”.

However, industry players and regulators had feared that making both announcements at around the same time could be confusing, according to letters from US and Japanese regulators seen by Reuters.


“We kindly ask both bodies to coordinate their efforts in reviewing aspartame to avoid any confusion or concerns among the public,” Mr Nozomi Tomita, an official from Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, wrote in a letter dated March 27 to WHO’s deputy director-general Zsuzsanna Jakab.

The letter, reviewed by Reuters, also called for the conclusions of both bodies to be released on the same day, as is now happening. The Japanese mission in Geneva, where WHO is based, did not respond to a request for comment.

The IARC classification for aspartame can have a huge impact.

In 2015, its committee concluded that glyphosate, a herbicide, is “probably carcinogenic”. Years later, even as other bodies like the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) contested this assessment, companies were still feeling the effects of the decision.

Germany’s Bayer in 2021 lost its third appeal against US court verdicts that awarded damages to customers blaming their cancers on use of its glyphosate-based weedkillers.

The IARC’s decisions have also faced criticism for sparking needless alarm over hard to avoid substances or situations. It had previously classified working overnight and consuming red meat as “probably cancer-causing”, and using mobile phones as “possibly cancer-causing”, similar to aspartame.

“IARC is not a food safety body and its review of aspartame is not scientifically comprehensive and is based heavily on widely discredited research,” said secretary-general of the International Sweeteners Association (ISA) Frances Hunt-Wood.

The association, whose members include food companies Mars Wrigley, a Coca-Cola unit, and Cargill, said it had “serious concerns with the IARC review, which may mislead consumers”.

Aspartame has been extensively studied for years. Last year, an observational study in France of 100,000 adults showed that people who consumed larger amounts of artificial sweeteners – including aspartame – had a slightly higher cancer risk.

It followed a study from the Ramazzini Institute in Italy in the early 2000s, which reported that some cancers in mice and rats were linked to aspartame.

However, the first study could not prove that aspartame caused the increased cancer risk, and questions have been raised about the methodology of the second study, including by EFSA, which assessed it.

Aspartame is authorised for use globally by regulators which have reviewed all the available evidence. Major food and beverage makers have for decades defended their use of the ingredient.

The IARC said it had assessed 1,300 studies in its June review.

Recent recipe tweaks by soft drink giant Pepsico demonstrate the struggle the industry has when it comes to balancing taste preferences with health concerns. Pepsico removed aspartame from its sodas in 2015, bringing it back a year later, only to remove it again in 2020.

Listing aspartame as a possible carcinogen is intended to motivate more research, said the sources close to the IARC. The move will help agencies, consumers and manufacturers draw firmer conclusions.

It will also likely ignite debate once again over the IARC’s role, as well as the safety of sweeteners in general.

In May, WHO published guidelines advising consumers not to use non-sugar sweeteners for weight control. The guidelines caused a furore in the food industry, which argued that such sweeteners can be helpful for consumers wanting to reduce the amount of sugar in their diet. REUTERS

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is aspartame, a possible cancer-causing ingredient found in sugar-free drinks?



SINGAPORE — Aspartame, a popular artificial sweetener found in Coca Cola diet sodas, yoghurt and other food products, is set to be declared a possible carcinogen in July by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the research arm of the World Health Organization (WHO), Reuters reported.

This means that it has the potential to cause cancer in human beings.

Reuters reported on Thursday (June 29) that shoppers can find aspartame in Weight Watchers yoghurts and some Snapple drinks, for example.


Discovered in 1965 by American chemist James Schlatter, aspartame is about 200 times sweeter than regular table sugar.

It was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration in 1974 for use as a tabletop sweetener and as an additive in chewing gum, breakfast cereals and dry bases for foods.


The low-calorie sugar substitute can be found in soft drinks, confectionery, desserts, sugar-free cough drops and gelatine (a substance typically made from animal bones and used especially to make certain jellies or candies).

Aspartame is also used to enhance the flavouring of baked and canned foods, powdered drink mixes, candy and puddings.


Saccharin, sucralose and neotame are among five other artificial sweeteners alongside aspartame authorised by a WHO expert committee on food additives.


Aspartame's use in food products has been debated for decades and has also prompted some companies to remove the compound from their products.

US food manufacturing company PepsiCo removed aspartame from some US diet sodas.

Although the company brought it back a year later, it again removed the ingredient in 2020.


Reuters reported that more than 90 countries, including Australia, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Spain and the United Kingdom, have reviewed aspartame and found it to be safe for human consumption and allowed its use.

In Singapore, the HealthXchange.sg website by public health cluster SingHealth shows aspartame to be one of the commonly available sugar substitutes in Singapore.

Dieticians said that sweeteners with little or no calories such as aspartame can help with weight management, but they emphasise that it is best to try to do without sweeteners and to acquire a palate that prefers less sweet tastes.

Sweeteners have not been found to help in reducing sugar cravings as well. Like sugar, they only provide temporary satisfaction for such cravings.

Sweeteners work best if used only in recommended amounts or less.

Most of the them are many times sweeter than sugar but because of the way they are packaged (tablet or powder form), most people tend to use more, based on the false assumption that the suggested amount will not sweeten the food.



Information published by the Singapore Food Agency in 2016 on its website showed that aspartame is generally safe and approved for use in food worldwide.

However, three groups of people are unable to safely consume aspartame, because they are unable to effectively metabolise the amino acid phenylalanine, a component of aspartame, and thus leads to it being accumulated at harmful levels. They are:

  • People with the phenylketonuria, a genetic disease
  • People with advanced liver disease
  • Pregnant women with hyperphenylalanine (having high levels of phenylalanine in blood)

Food products containing aspartame are required to be labelled with the words "Phenylketonurics: Contains Phenylalanine". WITH AGENCIES

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

update on SGLT2:


i was on SGLT2 which i fought with the doc for 1 yr  before they give me SGLT2. i was the drug for almost 1yr liao.


my blood sugar with SGLT2 + insulin was range on average  of 90 to 120 with HbA1c at 5.0% (last tested june 2023 and march 2023 was 5.1% ) and since i was on OMAD, my sugar was stable with not much spike. My sugar hardly ever go above 130, 2hr after dinner.



So i did a weekend test and stop taking SGLT2 with diet as per normal. my sugar went crazy. it hit range from  109 (sat morning. SGLT2 was still in my system, it take 24 hr to clear) to 188 ( after dinner  3hr later, which i have to increase my insulin by 50%)for sat. then next morning sunday it was 140 (need to inject to push the sugar down) and before dinner 139 and after dinner 135 (this was after i increase my insulin to nearly 50%)



recap, i always thought SGLT2 does a little to sugar level, nv knew it really help to keep my sugar stable and reduce the amount of dose i needed


those not taking SGLT2. can talk to your doc for advise. this morning i was on SGLT2, and tested sugar after 4hr later, it was at 87

Edited by The_King
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
Just now, Bigbird said:


Must be local copi meh??


If $7 starbutt how many folds?

not outside stall just buy freeze dried kopi and some stevia if needed


dont support outside stall, support your wallet, i outside drink my water bottle water, if not enough go baby room to refill, if cant then go supermarket buy



at home then drink what i want, tea, kopi etc....

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...

Important Information

Mugentech.net uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By using this site you agree to Privacy Policy