HEALTH Chemotherapy

N

NC Susan

Deceased
Chemotherapy for testicular cancer causes long-term neurological damage

MikeAdams.jpg
Friday, November 27, 2009
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...)

(NaturalNews) The November 25 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute contains a report about the long-term side effects experienced by men who received cisplatin-based chemotherapy for testicular cancer. Severe neurological side effects, discoloration of the hands and feet when exposed to the cold (Raynaud-like phenomena), tinnitus, and impaired hearing were found to be common in men who received chemotherapy as opposed to those who did not.

Men who received cancer treatment between 1980 and 1994 were given follow-up surveys between 1998 and 2002 to assess their conditions after treatment. Researchers found that in the decades following treatment, those men who received any form of chemotherapy were significantly more likely to be experiencing long-term negative side-effects as a result.

In the chemotherapy group, 39 percent of men reported Raynaud-like phenomena, 29 percent reported paresthesias in the hands or feet, 21 percent reported hearing impairment, and 22 percent reported tinnitus symptoms.

Marianne Brydoy, M.D., from Haukeland University's Department of Oncology in Norway, conducted the study with the help of her colleagues to verify the correlation between high rates of long-term neurological damage and chemotherapy. Since the control groups who did not receive any form of chemotherapy experienced far fewer neurological damage incidents than did those who received chemotherapy, the results are indicative of an underlying problem with chemotherapy treatment.

Experts aim to reassess proper treatments for testicular cancer. They hope to minimize the toxic side effects of chemotherapy by reformulating the levels of cisplatin used in chemotherapy treatment. According to their research, 20 mg/m2 a day is the maximum safe dosage of the drug.

Comments by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

As this study goes to show, chemotherapy is poison. While chemo may at first appear to be working by shrinking a tumor, it is in fact a systemic poison that will inevitably destroy cells throughout the body, most notably in the brain, heart, liver and kidneys.

The only way to protect yourself from these devastating effects of chemotherapy is to take protective nutritional supplements before undergoing chemo treatments. But oncologists sternly warn patients against consuming such nutritional supplements by citing one of the most oft-repeated myths of the cancer industry: "Nutritional supplements block the chemotherapy" they say!

It's a lie, of course, but it's been repeated so frequently by the cancer establishment that they can't even remember who uttered it first... or why. Truth be told, there is absolutely no science backing up such a false belief. No credible scientific study has ever found that antioxidants or other immune-boosting supplements impede chemotherapy treatments at all. In fact, many supplements potentiate the chemo for cancer cells while simultaneously reducing its toxic effects on healthy cells.

Then again, if cancer doctors knew anything at all about nutrition, they probably wouldn't be in the business of poisoning people with chemo in the first place.

Sources for this story include:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_relea...

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/...
 
N

NC Susan

Deceased
Common Pain Medication Fuels Cancer Growth

Friday, November 27, 2009 by: Sherry Baker, Health Sciences Editor
See all articles by this author
Email this author

(NaturalNews) Painkillers known as opiates are widely used to treat both acute and chronic pain. Morphine, in particular, is often used to relieve the pain experienced by cancer patients. But now comes evidence from two new studies that strongly indicates opiate-based painkillers actually fuel the growth and spread of malignancies.

The research presented in Boston on November 18, 2009, at "Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics," a joint meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research, the National Cancer Institute, and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, advances the concept that opiate drugs are cancer promoters. The research also explains how protecting cancer cells from opiates may reduce cell proliferation, invasion and migration.

The concept that opiate drugs used to help cancer patients might be contributing to cancer recurrence developed about eight years ago from several unrelated clinical and laboratory studies. First, a 2002 palliative care study found patients who received spinal rather than systemic pain relief from opiate drugs lived longer. A short time later, Jonathan Moss, professor of anesthesiology and critical care at the University of Chicago, reported that several cancer patients receiving a selective opiate blocker called methylnaltrexone (MNTX) which was developed in the 1980s to treat opiate-induced constipation lived far longer than they were expected to. Other studies had similar results.

"These were patients with advanced cancer and a life expectancy of one to two months yet several lived for another five or six. It made us wonder whether this was just a consequence of better GI function or could there possibly be an effect on the tumors," Moss said in a press statement.

Patrick A. Singleton, PhD, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago Medical Center, along with Moss, Joe G.N. Garcia, MD, professor of medicine at the University of Chicago, and colleagues decided to investigate the many peripheral effects of opiates that might encourage cancer growth and the potential benefits of blocking those effects. In laboratory studies using both cell cultures and mice, the scientists found that morphine did directly rev up the proliferation of tumor cells. It also inhibited the immune response, and promoted angiogenesis (the growth of the blood vessels that help "feed" tumors and allow them to thrive). In the research just presented by Singleton and colleagues, they focused on the mu opiate receptor as a regulator of tumor growth and metastasis and they documented the ability of MNTX to block the cancer-promoting effects of opiates on this receptor.

Bottom line: it appears time for doctors and patients to consider all the side effects of opiate pain relievers, including the fact they may spur cancer to grow. Blocking the cancer-fueling ability of opiates and/or using them for as short a time as possible -- or not at all unless absolutely necessary -- appears to be the safest, and healthiest course of action.

For more information:
http://www.aacr.org/home/scientists...
 
dissimulo

dissimulo

Membership Revoked
NC Susan said:
(NaturalNews) The November 25 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute contains a report about the long-term side effects experienced by men who received cisplatin-based chemotherapy for testicular cancer. Severe neurological side effects, discoloration of the hands and feet when exposed to the cold (Raynaud-like phenomena), tinnitus, and impaired hearing were found to be common in men who received chemotherapy as opposed to those who did not.
Click to expand...

They are also significantly more likely to still have their testicles.

I think everybody recognizes that chemotherapy has its downsides. Nobody signs up to take chemo for fun.

If you gave most guys a choice between keeping their testicles (and living) in exchange for some fairly minor neurological symptoms, you'd get about 100% in favor of chemo.

As far as protective supplementation goes, I think you'll find the research pretty spotty. Most doctors aren't going to make recommendations without data. Cancer needs vitamins too. It would be unfortunate to give the cancer a boost when you are trying to kill it.

Typical bilge from NaturalNews.
 
Last edited:
T

Troke

Deceased
People who are into purity absolutely refuse to believe there are always tradeoffs.

At the time my son got testicular cancer, 42 years ago, the five yr survival rate was about 1 (one) percent if it was not caught soon enough. He was one of 42 cases that survived. Because of his age, (18 months) no chemo was used. We lucked out all the way around.

Since then, chemotherapy has made the difference for those where it has spread. And that is a large percentage, maybe as high as 25%.
 
N

NC Susan

Deceased
LIGHTEN UP BOYS!

Instead of shooting down both articles, killing the messengers, reread and RETAIN the following important information

1) ....... [FONT=Verdana,Arial]Experts aim to reassess proper treatments for testicular cancer. They hope to minimize the toxic side effects of chemotherapy by reformulating the levels of cisplatin used in chemotherapy treatment. According to their research, 20 mg/m2 a day is the maximum safe dosage of the drug.


2)[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial]....... [/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial]evidence from two new studies that strongly indicates opiate-based painkillers actually fuel the growth and spread of malignancies.[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial]
[/FONT]
 
N

NC Susan

Deceased
http://newswithviews.com/Richards/byron187.htm

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]HOW FDA, BIG PHARMA, AND DOCTORS CAUSE INJURY FOR PROFIT[/FONT]​

By Byron J. Richards, CCN
November 4, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In some ways the health care in America is the finest in the world. In other ways it is a severe risk to health, even deadly. The dark side of this issue involves medication profits at the expense of human health. This questionable health care approach costs at least 200 billion dollars a year and involves the costs of the drugs themselves, the injuries they cause, and the appropriate law suits that follow. The perpetrators of this fraud are the pharmaceutical companies acting in tandem with the FDA, doctors paid under the table by Big Pharma, and gullible doctors willing to write off-label prescriptions based on the hype they hear from doctors on the take and Big Pharma sales reps.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Creating a market demand for this fraud is a health care system that blindly pays for it. This issue is causing millions of injuries a year and tens of thousands of deaths. It makes the Ponzi scheme run by Bernie Madoff pale in comparison. It is ruining the legitimate health care needs of a nation. Any expansion of mandatory health care funding will only make it worse, since the current scheme is set to feed off patients who don’t pay full price (or often any price) for the medications they “need.”[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The scandals involving inappropriate use of medications are so numerous they defy believability, with FDA management either tacitly allowing or actively helping the various drug companies. The FDA has a long history of pretense dating back to its inception over 100 years ago. It is part of the DNA of the FDA’s dysfunctional culture. FDA managers act in a revolving door capacity with the various industries they are supposed to be regulating. What FDA mangers actually do is more akin to the activities of a police-force bully. They seek to knock out competition for their friends in Big Pharma, Big Biotech, and Big Food, while acting as the gatekeepers of profits for the chosen few – often in disregard of the health consequences.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]It was only a few years ago that the FDA didn’t even know what drugs it had approved to be on the market. Far worse, the FDA is quite lax on requiring the mandatory follow-up safety testing for the drugs that have been approved. On October 26, 2009 the Government Accountability Office released a report blasting the FDA on this issue. The lack of FDA due diligence has resulted in a situation wherein doctors and patients do not have a clear picture of the actual risks of virtually any drug, including the blockbusters in common use (such as birth control pills). Big Pharma would rather not do these studies because when they do they often show the drug is far more dangerous than previously thought – which typically causes a drop in sales. Why would any drug company want to shoot itself in the foot?
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The negative data submitted to the FDA during the drug approval process is seldom ever published in any meaningful way or context. Rather, Big Pharma ensures that mostly the positive studies submitted to the FDA find their way into the literature. Again, this skews the public understanding of the drug. FDA management has been known to coerce and threaten its scientists to suppress negative news about drugs, often over-ruling their scientists so that a dangerous drug can be put on the market. Such FDA management coercion of its own scientific staff came into full public view when it was discovered how Avandia, a diabetes drug, could get on the market without any warning that it causes heart failure[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]A classic example of Big Pharma intentionally suppressing the negative studies so as to paint a false rosy picture of a medication’s benefits are the anti-depressants. In fact, the entire theory of the use of antidepressants upon which FDA-approved drug dispensing is based has recently been called into question. Yet, these near-useless drugs are top sellers to our children. The FDA yawns when antidepressant use is strongly linked to heart disease.[/FONT]​
​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The issue is complicated by the fact that the scientific literature was intended as a communication format between doctors, scientists, and other health professionals. It was never intended to have defense mechanisms against large financial interests trying to game the system for profit. The pharmaceutical industry ghostwrites many of the studies that promote the values of its drugs. Doctors and scientists put their names on the studies for a fee.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] Celebrity doctors are paid large amounts by Big Pharma to act as sales reps at “scientific” conferences. Universities and researchers who might publish negative data know they will be blacklisted from Big Pharma research spending in the future. Many doctors are on the Big Pharma payroll, taking what amounts to bribes, kickbacks, and other “gifts.” All doctors are subjected to intense Big Pharma propaganda as a major part of their training in medical school.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]A drug company doesn’t even have to prove a drug fixes anything. Drugs simply have to prove they can move numbers on paper (surrogate endpoints). This lax standard of effectiveness causes individuals to go on drugs to change numbers, take more drugs due to the side effects of the ones they are taking, and before long they are on ten drugs that don’t fix anything – piling on cost to the health care system and taxpayers.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Once drugs are on the market, Big Pharma uses all manner of illegal marketing to create buzz and demand for their drugs in ways that have never been tested for safety (off-label use). Some regulatory action has been taken in recent months against these crimes, although the damage is already done and the false markets have been created as doctors seem to have little ethical concern writing prescriptions for uses that have never been demonstrated as safe or effective. And then the Big Pharma lobby goes to work trying to get laws passed to expand its market (even tagetting children).[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Big Pharma builds the cost of the fines into the cost of the drugs, which are paid for in higher health care costs and taxes. It is how Big Pharma does business.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The FDA is impotent in defending the public from harm. It has been proven that all the newer drugs of the past decade are twice as likely to injure. While the FDA manages to report on the problem, it fails to do anything effective about it (which is how they plea to get more funding from Congress to spend on their pet projects, not safety).[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]This shifts the burden of demonstrating proof of harm to lawyers representing individuals who have been harmed and independent, poorly funded researchers who must risk the wrath of their colleagues to shine a light lot on huge problems. Such researchers are often operating without the original data submitted to the FDA. It takes years to pin down a problem. By then, the drug in question has already made its money (and caused its harm) or its patent is about to expire (meaning it is no longer a top priority for the drug company). Even when researchers present their findings of rather alarming harm, the FDA management yawns, drags its feet several more years, and then waters down its findings on the obvious problems so as to limit legal liability for its friends.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The examples of the drugs involved in this fraudulent charade are numerous, and especially involve drugs known as blockbusters (the big sellers). One of the most egregious examples is the atypical anti-psychotic medications – poisoning our children and elderly with unthinkable off-label use that is incredibly damaging to health. The atypical anti-psychotics include Zyprexa (Eli Lilly), Seroquel (AstraZeneca), Risperdal (Johnson & Johnson), Geodon (Pfizer), and a handful of others.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Since Eli Lilly knew that Zyprexa caused diabetes and didn’t let patients know this, they have already settled numerous “failure to warn” lawsuits totaling 1.2 billion dollars. This year they agreed to another 1.42 billion, $615 million to settle the Justice Department’s criminal investigation and approximately $800 million to settle the civil investigations brought by the states for Medicaid fraud. “Specifically, the plea states that Lilly promoted Zyprexa in elderly populations as treatment for dementia, including Alzheimer’s dementia, although Zyprexa is not approved for such uses,” the company said in a statement. Eli Lilly agreed to a misdemeanor charge, which is apparently the new standard for what a drug company gets when it kills elderly Americans (previously it was nothing). A
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]May 2009 study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine shows that even a single dose of anti-psychotic medication to an elderly patient doubles the risk of a serious adverse event leading to hospitalization and/or death.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Anti-psychotics have become popular for their off-label use as the “drug of obedience.” If you want a zombie, give the person an atypical anti-psychotic. They became incredibly popular in nursing homes, especially if a senior citizen arrived upset at the idea of being put in a nursing home. Or to keep patients with dementia from stirring up trouble. Likewise, children in orphanages are another popular target. These are extremely expensive drugs paid for by Medicare and Medicaid (taxpayers).[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]On October 29, 2009 AstraZeneca reached a $520 million agreement to settle two federal investigations and two whistle-blower lawsuits regarding Seroquel. One of the investigations was over improper activity of physicians involved in Seroquel clinical trials, apparently hiding the results of a negative drug trial prior to FDA approval and the other was over off-label use resulting in many children and elderly taking Seroquel.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Pfizer has agreed to pay $2.3 billion to settle criminal and civil liability due to its illegal off-label promotion of Bextra (a painkiller already pulled from the market), Geodon (like Zyprexa, an atypical anti-psychotic that injures children), Zyvox (an antibiotic), and Lyrica (an epilepsy drug). Pfizer will plead guilty to one felony count violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act for misbranding Bextra with the intent to defraud. Geodon has a smaller percentage of the 12-billion-dollar-a-year poisoning campaign of our children and elderly, pulling in around $750 million. It was widely promoted in an off-label manner for ADHD and behavioral issues facing children - a market that has been fraudulently created and continues to rack up sales.[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]And this past week Risperdol went on trial for its off-label uses. The opening day of testimony saw one of its salesman admit he promoted the drug for off-label uses and did so knowing what he was doing was illegal – expect another large settlement.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]While these settlements seem large they are costs that are passed on to the health care system as part of the price of the drug. Off-label financial penalties are nothing more than a marketing cost. And once the market is created doctors keep prescribing the medications for off-label use, thereby sustaining sales far in excess of any penalty.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]None of these financial penalties is as the result of FDA actions. To the contrary, in the midst of major controversy the FDA was found encouraging the use of these drugs on children! It is the lawsuits that are defending public safety because the FDA does not do its job. [/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]And then there are the independent studies that finally prove what the FDA likely knew over a decade ago. This past week a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association showed that children taking atypical anti-psychotic medication gained on average 18 pounds in 12 weeks. The shocking part of the study was not the massive weight gain – it was that it took over a decade for independent researchers to prove what the FDA and Big Pharma already knew. Needless to say, these children are on a fast track to heart disease, as changes in their LDL cholesterol and triglycerides clearly indicated.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The anti-psychotic medications serve as an example of the disregard for human health on the part of Big Pharma, the FDA, doctors and psychiatrists on the take, and those standing ready with their off-label Rx pads. Tens of billions in fraudulent profit has been made and continues to pile up. There are numerous other blockbuster drugs with similar sordid tales. This is how business is done. It is fraud. The FDA drags its feet and will continue to drag its feet, regardless of what studies are published. The FDA management is part of the fraud.[/FONT]​



​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In the short term the only way to stop this fraud is to prevent federal programs (Medicare and Medicaid) and insurance companies from paying for any off-label medication use. Also in the near term, off-label prescribing laws need to be drastically changed to protect the public. The use of all types of psychotropic medications on children needs to be drastically curtailed or outright banned. Over the next five to ten years medications already on the market need to prove their safety and actually prove they fix something in a definable period of time. If all a drug can do is change numbers it is, once again, nothing that taxpayers and insurance companies should have to pay for.[/FONT]​



​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]If people want to use drugs to change numbers, suppress symptoms, and conduct an experiment on themselves – fine – let them do so at their own expense. The problem with health care reform is that President Obama is in a big hurry to pass legislation with this system of fraud built in. In fact, the entire system is positioned to benefit thanks to the financial support Big Pharma is lending the administration, as the administration tries to make insurance companies out to be the villain.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Unless fraud is tackled head on, including the White House truly cleaning up its own FDA, there is no chance for containing health care costs in the current system or in anything currently proposed by the House or Senate.[/FONT]


[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Sign up for Byron’s free e-newsletter and be in the know.[/FONT]​
© 2009 Wellness Resources, Inc. - All Rights Reserved​
 
N

NC Susan

Deceased
http://newswithviews.com/Howenstine/james181.htm

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]STAY AWAY FROM CHEMOTHERAPY AND RADIATION[/FONT]​

By Dr. James Howenstine, MD.
November 21, 2009
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]NewsWithViews.com[/FONT]


[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]For many years it has been known to well informed individuals within the medical community that chemotherapy and radiation were quite toxic and essentially worthless in the management of malignancies. This information is carefully covered up by our controlled media so that these two methods of therapy are regarded by lay persons as the proven therapy for malignancies. Like lemmings going over a cliff the general public lines up for these therapies and nearly all treated persons proceed to die.[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]To the person who inquires how can an essentially worthless therapy continue to be used the answer is simple. It is all about money. Chemotherapy drugs bring in more than a trillion dollars annually to the pharmaceutical industry. Oncologists frequently make $1000 from every injection administered to a patient. There are 40 National Cancer Institute Centers scattered across the USA. Each of these employs thousands of employees. Curing cancer would be devastating for the economy and must not be allowed to occur. Research programs whose alleged purpose is to cure cancer see their funds steered into harmless areas where no cancer cures will ever result. Less than 1% of research funds are spent finding methods to prevent the spread of cancer. which is the cause of fatal cancer cachexia which kills 90% of cancer victims..[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Preventing unfavorable chemotherapy results from being seen by the public in TV, radio, and newspaper reporting is combined with malicious quackery charges and actual death threats to practitioners who have legitimate cancer cures.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]I am aware of at least a dozen cancer cures since 1900 that have been ignored or suppressed. Several persons with bonafide cancer cures have been so vilified they died alcoholics or committed suicide. Prominent physician Dr Milbrook Johnson was poisoned the night before he was scheduled to speak on a national radio network in the 1940s about the ability of Dr. Royal Rife’s electronic equipment to cure cancer and infections.

Both chemotherapy and radiation have such toxic effects on the human body they must be stopped before they kill the patient. In the early days of chemotherapy drugs it was noted that skeptical patients who refused to take chemotherapy usually lived longer than patients treated with chemotherapy. [/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Radiation therapy directed toward a bone containing cancer might initially seem innocuous but actually has effects throughout the body. Circulation of blood through areas of ionizing radiation being delivered to bone is able to transport this radiated blood to distant sites where it can injure bone marrow production of killer lymphocytes, red blood cells, macrophages and platelets. Loss of appetite and nausea can be seen. Conventional radiation to the abdomen and other areas may be followed by permanent injury to the small intestine (diarrhea, pain) and arteriosclerosis of arteries in any field of radiation.[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif] A suspected cancer patient had xray films showing numerous lucent identical sized masses overlying brain and spinal cord tissue. The films were misread as metastasis from a prior malignant melanoma instead of echinoccocal cysts spread from the family dogs.. Massive radiation of brain and spinal cord tissue caused complete loss of appetite with no food intake and death in 8 days in a previously well 26 year old woman.[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]What are results of chemotherapy drugs?
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Associate Professor Graeme Morgan of Australia was the lead researcher on an article titled “The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5 year survival n adult malignancies.” This research showed that chemotherapy improved 5 year survival by less than 3% in adults with cancer.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In 1987 Dr. Lana Levi of the University of California wrote “most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. It does not eliminate breast, colon, or lung cancer. This fact has been known for over a decade. Women with breast cancer are likely to die faster with chemotherapy than without it.”[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Dr. Ralph Moss Ph.D relates that “Conventional Cancer therapy is so toxic and dehumanizing that I fear it more than I fear death from cancer. Yet most alternative therapies regardless of potential or proven benefit, are outlawed, which forces patients to submit to the failures that we know don’t work because there is no other choice. Dr. Moss was employed as a science writer for Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. Chemotherapy drugs are cellular poisons so they are quite toxic. They are also quite expensive. In his book The Cancer Industry he documents how the close links between the pharmaceutical industry and the cancer establishment enables an inadequate therapy like chemotherapy to become promoted and established as standard care”.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In a 1995 interview Dr. Moss related that chemotherapy was effective in only 2 to 4 % of all malignancies (Hodgkin’s Disease, Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia, childhood leukemia, testicular cancer and Choriocarcinoma.)[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The package inserts for chemotherapy drugs admit that taking a course of chemotherapy drugs can increase your risk of subsequently developing a new cancer by about 10%..
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) warns that the powerful drugs used in chemotherapy can cause cancer in employees who handle them (nurses, pharmacists, cleaning personnel). If continued too long these drugs are fatal.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The damage to white blood cell , killer lymphocyte and red blood cell production makes the patient vulnerable to overwhelming infection which is the cause of death in many patients on chemotherapy and radiation. It never made sense to me why administering toxic substances that cause major side effects could possibly heal a serious illness like a malignancy.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Dr. William Campbell Douglass II, MD “To understand the utter hypocrisy of chemotherapy, consider the following: The McGill Cancer Center in Canada, one of the largest and most prestigious cancer treatment centers in the world, did a study of oncologists to determine how they would respond to a diagnosis of cancer. On the confidential questionnaire, 58 out of 64 doctors said that all chemotherapy programs were unacceptable to them and their family.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In 33 years of conventional medical practice I referred all patients with malignancies to oncologists. The only survivor was a Chinese man with a low grade lung cancer. He responded every five years or so to a few doses of radiation.[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In my opinion one of the most important verses in the Bible is Proverbs 14:12 There is way that seems right unto man but its end is the way of death. Drug company owners and executives, politicians, world leaders and media executives have unbelievable wealth and power in this world. However, they face a tortured eternity following death. This seems to be a very unwise tradeoff.[/FONT]​

​
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Anyone reading this article has my permission to copy or publish this information. Hopefully, some individuals will be made aware that there are safe effective alternatives to chemotherapy and radiation in the treatment of malignancies.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]​
© 2009 Dr. James Howenstine - All Rights Reserved​
 
rcstew

rcstew

Veteran Member
NC Susan said:
Common Pain Medication Fuels Cancer Growth

Friday, November 27, 2009 by: Sherry Baker, Health Sciences Editor
See all articles by this author
Email this author

Patrick A. Singleton, PhD, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago Medical Center, along with Moss, Joe G.N. Garcia, MD, professor of medicine at the University of Chicago, and colleagues decided to investigate the many peripheral effects of opiates that might encourage cancer growth and the potential benefits of blocking those effects. In laboratory studies using both cell cultures and mice, the scientists found that morphine did directly rev up the proliferation of tumor cells. It also inhibited the immune response, and promoted angiogenesis (the growth of the blood vessels that help "feed" tumors and allow them to thrive). In the research just presented by Singleton and colleagues, they focused on the mu opiate receptor as a regulator of tumor growth and metastasis and they documented the ability of MNTX to block the cancer-promoting effects of opiates on this receptor.
Click to expand...

This is pretty interesting. Here is a link to an article that gives a bit more information on how the drug methylnaltrexone seems to inhibit cancer growth and invasion. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_cancer_morphine


NC Susan said:
Patrick A. Singleton, PhD, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago Medical Center, along with Moss, Joe G.N. Garcia, MD, professor of medicine at the University of Chicago, and colleagues decided to investigate the many peripheral effects of opiates that might encourage cancer growth and the potential benefits of blocking those effects. In laboratory studies using both cell cultures and mice, the scientists found that morphine did directly rev up the proliferation of tumor cells. It also inhibited the immune response, and promoted angiogenesis (the growth of the blood vessels that help "feed" tumors and allow them to thrive).
Click to expand...

Susan, if you come across a link to this study could you post it? I briefly searched for it but was unable to find anything. I am really curious as to the patho behind the angiogenesis.

Cisplatin does have some pretty horrendous side effects. It's used for a few other cancers as well as testicular. It causes more nausea and vomiting than any chemo I have ever administered. It is ototoxic and hearing loss is pretty common as well and can be pretty severe. I hope the studies prove that the side effects are dose related and that it can be as effective at lower doses.

dissimulo said:
If you gave most guys a choice between keeping their testicles (and living) in exchange for some fairly minor neurological symptoms, you'd get about 100% in favor of chemo.
Click to expand...

I have always wondered why they don't have implants for men. :shr:
 
KerryAnn

KerryAnn

Inactive
Dis, Reynauds isn't a minor problem. Not in the least. I've got some family members who suffer from it, and they suffer severely.
 
dissimulo

dissimulo

Membership Revoked
KerryAnn said:
Dis, Reynauds isn't a minor problem. Not in the least. I've got some family members who suffer from it, and they suffer severely.
Click to expand...

The article seems to indicate that this isn't Reynaud's, but some phenomenon with similar symptoms. Second, everything is a matter of perspective, but I'd have to say Raynaud's is pretty minor for most people. Some will go on to have tissue damage, but not most. Don't get me wrong - any chronic condition sucks, but I'd be pretty happy to live with Reynaud's if that was what it took to survive.
 
Last edited:
Mrs Smith

Mrs Smith

Inactive
Just found out last night that my youngest cousin (46 yo female) has been diagnosed with cancer in both lungs and brain. Her oldest daughter recently had a little girl, so Kim is a grandmother now. She's undergone her first chemo treatment for the brain cancer.
 
N

NC Susan

Deceased
for rcstew:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091118143209.htm

Common Pain Relief Medication May Encourage Cancer Growth

ScienceDaily (Nov. 19, 2009) —



Although morphine has been the gold-standard treatment for postoperative and chronic cancer pain for two centuries, a growing body of evidence is showing that opiate-based painkillers can stimulate the growth and spread of cancer cells. Two new studies advance that argument and demonstrate how shielding lung cancer cells from opiates reduces cell proliferation, invasion and migration in both cell-culture and mouse models.
See Also:
Health & Medicine

Mind & Brain

Reference


The reports--to be presented November 18, 2009, at "Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics," a joint meeting in Boston of the American Association for Cancer Research, the National Cancer Institute, and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer--highlight the mu opiate receptor, where morphine works, as a potential therapeutic target.


"If confirmed clinically, this could change how we do surgical anesthesia for our cancer patients," said Patrick A. Singleton, PhD, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Chicago Medical Center and principal author of both studies. "It also suggests potential new applications for this novel class of drugs which should be explored."
The proposition that opiates influence cancer recurrence, prompted by several unrelated clinical and laboratory studies, has gradually gained support. It started with a 2002 palliative-care trial in which patients who received spinal rather than systemic pain relief survived longer. Soon after that, Singleton's colleague, anesthesiologist Jonathan Moss, noticed that several cancer patients receiving a selective opiate blocker in a compassionate-use protocol lived longer than expected. Two recent retrospective studies found that breast and prostate cancer patients who received regional rather than general anesthesia had fewer recurrences. In February, 2009, the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation highlighted the issue.


Moss's palliative-care patients were taking methylnaltrexone (MNTX), developed in the 1980s for opiate-induced constipation by the late University of Chicago pharmacologist Leon Goldberg. Goldberg modified an established drug that blocks morphine so that it could no longer cross the protective barrier that surrounds the brain. So MNTX blocks morphine's peripheral side effects but does not interfere with its effect on pain, which is centered in the brain. It won FDA approval in 2008.
"These were patients with advanced cancer and a life expectancy of one to two months," Moss recalled, "yet several lived for another five or six. It made us wonder whether this was just a consequence of better GI function or could there possibly be an effect on the tumors."
So Singleton, Moss and colleagues, including Joe G.N. Garcia, MD, professor of medicine at the University of Chicago, began a series of studies looking at the many peripheral effects of opiates and the potential benefits of blocking those effects.


In laboratory studies, morphine can directly boost tumor-cell proliferation and inhibit the immune response. The researchers found that opiates also promote angiogenesis, the growth of new blood vessels, and decrease barrier function--effects that may exacerbate diseases involving vascular leakiness including acute lung injury in experimental models. In a surgical setting, decreased barrier function may make it easier for tumors to invade tissue and spread to distant sites. Increased angiogenesis helps cancers thrive in a new site.


In the studies to be presented Nov. 18, Singleton and colleagues focus on the mu opiate receptor as a regulator of tumor growth and metastasis and examine the ability of methylnaltrexone to attenuate these effects.
Using two different models of non-small cell lung cancer, the research teams showed that MNTX inhibited the tumor-promoting effects of opiates. In one study, using bronchioloalveolar carcinoma cells, MNTX blocked oncogenic signaling and prevented tumor-cell proliferation and migration.
In the other study, using Lewis lung carcinoma cells, mice without the mu opiate receptor did not develop the tumors that normal mice did when injected with cancer cells. The researchers further showed that MNTX reduced proliferation of cancer cells by 90 percent in normal mice. It also prevented invasion in cell culture and tumor growth and metastasis in mice.
The opioid receptor promotes Lewis lung cancer tumor growth, angiogenesis and metastasis, the authors conclude in a summary of the second study. "Methylnaltrexone attenuates these oncogenic effects."


"In conjunction with previous studies on opiate-induced angiogenesis by our laboratory and others, these experimental data suggest a plausible explanation for the epidemiologic observations," notes Moss, professor of anesthesiology and critical care at the University of Chicago. "If these laboratory studies are confirmed clinically, the selection of anesthetic technique used during the operative procedure and the possible use of opiate antagonists in the perioperative period may be important."
Additional contributors to the project include Frances Lennon, PhD, Biji Mathew, PhD, and Ravi Salgia, MD, all of the University of Chicago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top