Print Friendly and PDF

Sharon Osbourne Surgically Removes Breast to ‘Prevent’ Breast Cancer

Anthony Gucciardi
November 5th, 2012
Updated 11/05/2012 at 2:13 am
Pin It

sharonosbourne 245x163 Sharon Osbourne Surgically Removes Breast to Prevent Breast CancerCelebrity Sharon Osbourne, wife of the famous Ozzy Osbourne, is the latest victim of a ridiculous mainstream medical trend known as ‘preventative’ body part removal. As I’ve covered in the past, many doctors are now actually recommending that those with ‘faulty’ genes actually remove body parts to avoid the very possibility of contracting cancer. Of course a bounty of powerful research shows that high powered nutrition can literally affect your genetic expression, but it appears that these doctors do not seem to care.

Just like other women who have been convinced by their doctors that their ‘faulty’ genes set them up for a lifetime of cancer suffering, Sharon Osbourne recently endured the 13-hour double masectomy after her physician’s genetic tests revealed that she had ‘inherited a gene fault’ that was thought to increase her risk of breast cancer. According to Osbourne, she felt like there was nothing else she could do to prevent a second case of cancer after previously dealing with colon cancer:

“I’ve had cancer before and I didn’t want to live under that cloud: I decided to just take everything off, and had a double mastectomy.”

The fact that Sharon’s doctors did not tell her about the healing power of nutrition and lifestyle is both heavily disturbing and unfortunate. It is also not an isolated case. As CNN has reported, other women like mother Allison Gilbert have been talked into removing more than just their breasts by their doctors. In order to ‘stay alive for her children’, Gilbert actually removed both her breasts and ovaries despite not testing positive for any form of cancer. Gilbert stated that she did so at the urge of her gynecologist, and felt like there was little choice in the matter.

Doctors Fail to Mention Nutrition Fights Cancer, Dramatically Influences Gene Expression

What the doctors failed to tell Osbourne and Gilbert is that by simply altering their nutritional choices they could have significantly influenced the expression of their genes. This has been demonstrated in numerous instances of scientific research, but the Norwegian University of Science and Technology is one of the latest organizations to highlight the effects. It is important, first, however, to understand how inflammation works within the body. You see inflammation has not only been linked to many of the world’s leading diseases such as cancer and heart disease, but it is actually thought to be at the heart of virtually all chronic disease.

This is important because the information from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology actually explains how nutrition can directly impact the presence of cancer-linked inflammation through altering the very genes that cause inflammation. It can create or eliminate inflammation in the body. By making the right food choices (high quality, nutrition-packed superfoods) you can literally affect the genes that cause inflammation within the body. The lead researcher from the study summarizes:

“This affects not only the genes that cause inflammation in the body, which was what we originally wanted to study, but also genes associated with development of cardiovascular disease, some cancers, dementia, and type 2 diabetes — all the major lifestyle-related diseases.”

It has also been well-documented that antioxidants perform similar functions, with antioxidant-rich foods fighting cancer at a genetic level. Jefferson’s Kimmel Cancer Center researchers explain the findings of their research on this subject:

 “Now we have genetic proof that mitochondrial oxidative stress is important for driving tumor growth,” said lead researcher Michael P. Lisanti, M.D., Ph.D.

When it comes down to it, many doctors are stuck in the ‘old paradigm’ of medicine and fail to discuss with patients the reality of transforming their health without resorting to ridiculous procedures like preventative body part removal. The fact that celebrities are now partaking in this process and the media is running with it as a valiant and intelligent thing to do will only further propel the prevalence of this procedure to new limits.

To be clear, I do not think that Sharon Osbourne means any harm to anyone personally and was genuinely driven to have this procedure thanks to her doctors terrifying her into the decision. In fact, I only wish that Osbourne would have been educated as to the powerful benefits of nutrition and lifestyle before she was driven to make the decision. Had she gone public with such an inspiring story, it would have actually led millions around the globe to find the information for themselves.

About Anthony Gucciardi:
1.thumbnail Sharon Osbourne Surgically Removes Breast to Prevent Breast CancerGoogle Plus ProfileAnthony is the Editor of NaturalSociety whose work has been read by millions worldwide and is routinely featured on major alternative and mainstream news website alike, including the powerful Drudge Report, NaturalNews, Daily Mail, and many others. Anthony has appeared on programs like Russia Today (RT), Savage Nation, The Alex Jones Show, Coast to Coast AM, and many others. Anthony is also dedicated to aiding various non-profit organizations focused around health and rehabilitation as well as the creator of the independent political website Storyleak

From around the web:

  • Claude

    The FDA ruled in 2004 that efedra increased the risk of developing the

    condition than the general population. Of course, many of the

    side effects are considered common and not alarming, if they get pregnancy counseling, enroll in a healthy manner without injuring the body.

    Delicious snacks, soups, wraps, and skillet-based meals.

    37 crore Like in other states, the mall in Anand will operate under the ‘Best Price Modern Wholesale’ erection science name.

    What is actually in the diet formulation should include a low carbohydrate diet.

  • Kai

    poor woman – but knowing her a bunch
    this brit will do this for a big chunk of $
    from AMA

  • Tony Millward

    "To be clear, I do not think that Sharon Osbourne means any harm to anyone personally and was genuinely driven to have this procedure thanks to her doctors terrifying her into the decision"

    Well obviously she didn't do it to spite anyone. That would be a bit drastic don't you think?

  • Kathy Hughes

    For those who support this kind of 'therapy', I have not walked in your shoes. If I felt my family around me were affected by cancer I would be frightened too if I also followed the mainstream idea of what cancer really is. We have to stop fearing cancer and understand what it really is. Don Tolman brilliant explains this as a garbage disposal to help protect the body. Please, before you are led by fear, understand your body's incredible healing powers. Your body can heal if provided with the right environment. Check out how hundreds of people are curing themselves naturally of cancer. 'Cancer is Curable' and many other excellent videos. And why do so many die? It is known that the 'treatments' of cancer kill and many cancers are best left alone. It's time to take a look at the truth that modern medicine cancer treatments are not working. It's time to change the way we view cancer…it's increasing, not decreasing…WHY????

  • Deborah

    The automatic cut and slice attitudes for diseases that strike females were scary enough. Now it’s called preventive medicine. I call it sexism.

    I was having chronic urinary tract infection symptoms, so I went to see “an expert”, an urologist to find out why. After she viewed the sonograms, she said that nothing was wrong other than my uterus was leaning forward and pressing against the top part of my bladder. She said that since I was menopausal, I should have my uterus taken out. What?

    When I talked to a friend about it, she suggested drinking more water and trying standing up over the toilet to straighten out my abdomen. The next time I felt like I was getting an infection, I immediately did what my friend had suggested. After 24 hours, all symptoms were gone. When I got another one two weeks later, I repeat the experiment. It worked again.

    When the assistant of the urologist called to ask me if I had yet made an appointment to see a GYN/OB doctor about having my uterus taken out, and if I wanted to make another appointment with the urologist, I laughed then said that I have no intention to see a doctor who had misdiagnosed my problem AND who had said that I should have my uterus taken out because “I no longer had any usage for it anyway.”

    Like the old saying goes: Don’t fix what isn’t broken.

  • Beverly Bee

    Some experts have argued that even for high-risk women, prophylactic mastectomy is inappropriate, because not all breast tissue can be removed during a surgical procedure. In addition, the only group undergoing prophylactic mastectomy that had a survival advantage (lived longer) were pre-menopausal women, with endocrine receptor-negative breast cancers. To understand why, we need to know what comprises breast tissue and where cancer originates.

  • Beverly Bee

    Primary peritoneal carcinoma after prophylactic oophorectomy in women with a family history of ovarian cancer. A report of the Gilda Radner Familial Ovarian Cancer Registry.

    Piver MS, Jishi MF, Tsukada Y, Nava G.


    Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York 14263.



    According to previous reports, primary peritoneal carcinoma indistinguishable from primary ovarian adenocarcinoma had developed in five women with a history of familial ovarian cancer who had undergone prophylactic oophorectomy.


    The records from the Gilda Radner Familial Ovarian Cancer Registry were reviewed for instances of prophylactic oophorectomy and cases of primary peritoneal carcinoma occurring after prophylactic oophorectomy.


    From 1981 through July 1992, the Gilda Radner Familial Ovarian Cancer Registry accessioned 931 families (a total of 2221 cases of familial ovarian cancer). Currently, 324 women in these families have undergone prophylactic oophorectomy as a preventive measure against the subsequent development of ovarian cancer. Primary peritoneal carcinoma indistinguishable histologically from primary ovarian adenocarcinoma has developed in six of these women 1-27 years after prophylactic oophorectomy.


    Based on this finding and other reports of such primary peritoneal carcinoma, a prospective international study is planned. This study will compare the incidence of peritoneal carcinoma in first- or second-degree relatives who underwent prophylactic oophorectomy because of a family history of ovarian cancer with that of those who did not undergo prophylactic oophorectomy.

    PMID: 8467455 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    Publication Types, MeSH Terms

    LinkOut – more resources

  • xyz

    seriously hard 2 believe :(

  • Beverly Bee

    People are forgetting(or aren't aware)that you can still get ovarian cancer after removing both ovaries, and you can still get breast cancer after removing breasts. Why aren't people talking about that?

    • Beverly Bee

      And cane sugar is fructose.

  • margaret

    Is it all right to eat natural cane sugar or is it also "contaminated" with fructose? Thanks

    • Greg

      contaminated with fructose? I believe it is sucrose. Fructose is fine in it's natural state – in fruits, vegetables the problem is the pervasive use of it in the food industry. If you eat a diet that consists of mostly natural foods, it should not be a concern for you. You should also be aware that natural cane sugar will have the effect as white sugar – it really is not any better for you. The best sweeteners to use are honey, maple syrup and molasses.

      • ed the grocer

        All are half fructose. At worst use dextrose ( glucose ) although it is likely GMO. A small amount of local unpasteurized honey used uncooked is good. Otherwise a small bit of fresh fruit each day.

  • cpmt

    WELL I AM WITH HER… I think women with the positive gene for cancer should have their breast removed before they get the cancer and die from it. If every 10 women 7 get cancer YOU WILL DO THE SAME THING. specially if you have taken birth control or HRT. hormon replacement during menopausal time.

    • Greg

      Hormone replacement is one of the worst possible options for treating menopause, which is a natural process not an affliction andd it just further illustrates the point that Doctors and medical science are routinely wrong. No one is condemning Sharon Osbourne's actions just questioning the decision to do so. After it's your body, you can choose to be mutilated or you can take steps towards prevention. Unfortunately most people are too passive when it comes to their health. They foolishly believe that allopathic, Cartesian-based medicine is the be all and end-all for healthcare. Nothing could be further from the truth. People need to realize their health care is their responsibility, not the Doctors.

    • Kristie

      what happens if you have a gene for brain cancer? Are you going to be supporting the removal of brains also? No wonder our country is in such a mess….

  • Greg

    I saw the episode of Dr Oz in which the 2 women and several other family members spoke about having their stomachs removed due to the prevalance of stomach cancer. This is different from having body parts removed due to a genetic marker. In once instance there is documented evidence, in the other it is showing a propensity towards developing cancer, which is not a guarantee. The same as removal of body parts doesn't guarantee you won't be afflicted by it. Doctors don't know enough about how cancer develops and spreads to be making this type of recommendation – it is mutilation. Environment is a huge factor, as is exposure to cleaning chemicals, solvents, paints, aerosols, etc. Even things like dryer sheets and memory foam are suspected sources of carcinogens. And the air we breathe is highly suspect too. Every year industry around the globe pumps somewhere on the order of 600 billion tonnes of pollutants into the atmosphere. And still there is another source of carcinogens in microwave transmissions – cellphones, cordless phones, wireless internet, etc not to mention electro-magnetic fields generated by powerlines and the wiring in our homes. It is a never-ending battle so to lop off body parts as a preventative measure without examining possible causes such as lifestyle choices and environmental factors is unconscionable

  • Violet

    Western 'medicine' scares women into removing their body parts if there is a 'risk' for cancer & it is pathetic. I feel sorry for the women who ever had to fear for their lives because of what some mainstream medicine doctor says to them.

    My mom was scared into a hysterectomy because a test showed some abnormal cells(which were a result of her idiot doctor not monitoring her 'bioidentical hormone replacement therapy' closely enough); but a second test showed normal cells & then a third test again showed abnormal cells; (Of course the labs were read by different pathologists where more human error can occur).

    Finally against ALL of our (& her) best judgement & intuition, she was scared into the removal of her uterus "to be sure the cancer wouldn't return or spread" & the final findings were that it was NOT necessary and the cells were Normal. NEVER silence your inner voice!

    On a side note: If you have a mouth full of amalgam/mercury fillings &/or root canals; Both have been directly linked to cancer, also if you eat non organic foods and drink tap water that raises your risks, add to that any prescriptions you may be already on which adds problems to the ones it 'manages' & top it off with any 'flu shots' or 'vaccines' which contain mercury and a host of other toxins. Try and live as clean as you can & if you are diagnosed with anything, always get a 2nd, third or even fourth opinion from well researched and well known specialists if you use western medicine(& best of luck with that).

  • Buffet

    Don't guess Ozzy'll be Farkin' her anymore!

  • yankee phil

    Although there may be some validity to these preventative measures, I have found in my own experience that the environment you grow up in, which can be shared by close family members, may be a major contributor to the incidence of cancer in your family. Small towns that get residual overspray from crop dusting activity, cities where the water supply is contaminated by carcinogens from waste dumping irresponsibly, I could list a hundred more examples where areas have unusually high cancer and leukemia rates that have been exposed to some sort of known cancer causing source. Perhaps a sort of environmental surgery is needed to clean up our food and water supplies, hell even the air we breath needs to be looked at in industrial areas where extremely tall chimney's are required due to their dispersant qualities of poisonous effluent. I swam in a small lake that was built over an old city dump from Amsterdam. When I came out of the water I smelled like paint thinner, not 100 meters away were paling(eel) traps that were being harvested by a professional fisherman. Smoked Paling is very popular in Holland and a very profitable source of income for the fish farmers. Self mutilation is the reaction of a caged animal gone mad with despair. Don't give up hope.

    • cpmt

      ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH YOU. I KNOW OF A lady ( a friend) that ALL HER FAMILY had cancer… mom breast C. two sisters blood cancer, and her a very rare blood cancer (with no treatment known). … ENVIRONMENT and TOXINS (including meds.) DOES A LOT and causes many cancers today. Even the food we eat full with pestesides and hormones antibiotics etc..

  • Renee W

    Every case is unique and no one should blindly be saying that a healthy diet or the right vitamins, etc. will prevent cancer. There were two women I once saw on tv. Their parents, brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins had stomach cancer and died. They had very little family left and decided to remove their stomachs. In that scenerio those 2 women made a hard decision and decided to live. Their chance of getting that cancer and dying was 100% before the surgery. Now it is 0%.

  • Bearnairdin

    this is such a terrible thing – doctors terrorising people in to doing this! What I dont understand is, how people fail to recognise that if that were what is going to help prevent a cancer growth they would also have to remove the colon…….or the kidneys………or the lungs…….?????????

  • Kris H

    As a thirty-something woman who has tested positive for the BRCA 1 gene, which raises my chances of ending up with breast or ovarian cancer at a young age to very high percentages, I find this article and corresponding comments to be so judgmental. I lost my maternal grandmother (at 60) and mother (at 50) to ovarian cancer, and have now been standing by my aunt as she has been battling breast cancer for five years. My grandmother also had breast cancer at 37. Now I am the mother of a 7 month old girl, and am faced with my own decisions. I fully believe in the power of nutrition and many other alternative "cancer fighters", and use these to try and stay healthy. However, if I decide that removing my breasts and/or ovaries to reduce my chances of developing breast and ovarian cancer by 90-95% and ensure that my young daughter does not end up motherless, that is MY life decision. It's easy to sit there and judge and say someone was "fear-mongered" by their doctors and completely unaware of the benefits of nutrition but you haven't walked in mine or Sharon's shoes. It's impossible for you to know how you would feel after going through what I have, and then having the same genetic predisposition on top of that.

    • Bearnairdin

      in my case that is not entirely true – I have actually had a cancerous growth, got it removed nothing else, 14 years ago, and since then have been living a much healthier life style, mainly rawfood, no sugars etc – no recurrence whatsoever !I also have the gene that says there is a possibility of cancer…….. and my father and an aunt or 2 had cancer – but that does not mean that I will get it, and I dont allow myself to be intimidated. Just my thoughts, no offense intended. Best wishes !

    • cpmt

      Agree with you. I would to the same. After you have the number of children you want to have,… do it. it is your life… and you children deserve a mother. My co

      wife's sister and mother both died young from Brst cancer. It runs in her family. The best thing she can do is having both breast removed, specially because she too have the BRCA 1 positive .

    • Rachel

      Yes I totally agree with you. My sister died from this mutation. This is not mutilation, but is saving lives. The numbers are extremely high for getting breast and ovarian cancer. Who of you would like to flip that coin?! You all need to learn alot more information here! A healthy diet is hardly a guarantee for people with mutations and an 70 percent risk of breast cancer and a forty percent of ovarian with almost a zero cure rate.I notice that the men have more an issue with this. Women who worry about being unattractive need to think about being dead while their husband remarries!

      • Greg

        Lopping off breasts and removing ovaries is no guarantee against contracting cancer. A healthy diet that removes toxins and free-radicals is a good place to start. And realize that once a tumor is found it could be too late – the horse has already left the barn, so to speak.

  • Cecily Porter

    The truly sad part of this is that Sharon is no less informed than her docs. They are just pawns of the drug companies and have no knowledge whatsoever of nutrition and health. Allopathic docs are in the BUSINESS of health, they have no knowledge of health. For that you need to go to a naturopathic doc, and even then, you can be led off course. A vegan diet with a high percentage of raw fruit and veg with no GMOs will take you a long way toward being healthy.

  • Samantha

    You know……IF men were encouraged to have their testicals or penises removed……just in case….to prevent cancer….RIGHT!!! Like THAT would ever happen! This almost obsession we see now with breast cancer is beginning to really feel like part of the War on Women!

    • cpmt

      I have 11 friends from my old country. 6 have breast (Brst)cancer…. it is an epidemic. when I talk to people every two or three someone have Brst. Cancer. You never know if you will be one of the 6… friends that will get cancer. By the way, all 6 had taken HRT. -hormon replacement therapy-

      • Greg

        Do you think HRT might have something to do with it? Cutting off body parts is a very drastic option and really should only be considered as a last possible resort. And it really is not for you to advocate, no matter your feelings about it. Environment and lifestyle, particularly diet are huge factors in the incidences of cancer. An examination of those could prove very useful. One of the most often cited sources of cancer causing agents is chemical pollutants in the environment, even the water supply of major cities contain harmful toxins. All I'm saying is that without any understanding of underlying causes it is wrong to advocate a mastectomy. And as pointed out, it is no guarantee you won't get cancer, furthermore it can give women a false sense of security

  • Dave W

    I see people follow the white lab coats religiously, but I have to say I'm pretty shocked by this one. Sharon seems to be an intelligent person, I guess she's not well informed. We don't have to live like this!

    • cpmt

      she is possitibly well informed, and is up to her to choose surgery that will save her life.

  • Jimmy Russels

    Uh oh, I might get testicular cancer. Better remove my testicles.

    Uh oh, I might get skin cancer. Better remove my skin.

    Uh oh, I might get brain cancer. Better remove my brain.

    • cpmt

      you will not joke if you were the one with cancer.

    • Rachel

      Research the numbers! Your totally ignorant of the stats and should be advised that men with the BRCA mutation have higher risks of pancreatic and prostate cancer. I speak for my dead sibling !!