Cancer. What is it and treatments.

[Kgal]

I don't know well enough about medicine to answer your question, but I can guess that increase the number of healthy bacteria that fights that fungus, and introduce some fungicide to fight the fungus. We might not have the medicine available for dogs because their chemistry is different than ours. What we have for humans might not work for dogs in the way that grapes or chocolate is ok for us, but toxic to dogs.

I found this on a website:


http://www.lef.org/protocols/infections/fungal_infections_candida_01.htm

Ah.

So you don't really know whether fungicides will push the fungus back to so called normal levels in humans or not.
Danngg....and here I thought I'd finally found a real answer.

Oh well...thank you for the link. I shall do some research.

 

[dogman6126]

Rain washes chemicals off the crops into the soil where the crops roots are=double exposure to chemicals

Muir if you wish, you can start another thread on this topic, however like I have said a few times now, this is not the point of this thread. I'll remind you, the point of this thread is to discuss what cancer is and treatments for it.

 

[dogman6126]

Ah.

So you don't really know whether fungicides will push the fungus back to so called normal levels in humans or not.
Danngg....and here I thought I'd finally found a real answer.

Oh well...thank you for the link. I shall do some research.

Off the top of my head, no I don't know the statistical success for fungicides in systemic fungal infections. I would expect it to be challenging (making sure you don't kill to much fungus and then the bacteria takes over), however I also would think that if treated early enough it would be very successful. As with any disease, the more time it has had to spread and damage the body, the harder it is to fix. I do know that we are very successful with localized infections. Athletes foot is a perfect example

 

[muir]

Muir if you wish, you can start another thread on this topic, however like I have said a few times now, this is not the point of this thread. I'll remind you, the point of this thread is to discuss what cancer is and treatments for it.

Stop talking about it then

 

[Flavus Aquila]

[video=youtube;wLoRFTbIakk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLoRFTbIakk[/video]

Advocating marijuana... so predictable.

Let me guess... cannabis, besides curing cancer, is also effective for curing baldness and impotence. I'm expecting you to claim that cannabis is also a 'miracle' fat-burner and cholesterol-buster.

 

[muir]

Advocating marijuana... so predictable.

Let me guess... cannabis, besides curing cancer, is also effective for curing baldness and impotence. I'm expecting you to claim that cannabis is also a 'miracle' fat-burner and cholesterol-buster.

What matters is not: can flavus aquila score some debating points againt muir? (as part of some little ego struggle)

What matters is: is the information that muir is posting here true?

Because statistically 1 in 3 of us is going to get cancer and 1 in 4 of us is going to die from it

If you look at the number of people who overtime might read this thread there is a high chance that one of them will get cancer or know someone who gets cancer

Now if they read this thread and find that there are alternative cures that their mainstream doctor is not telling them about then they have the option of trying those cures before going down the extremely harmful chemotherapy route

Whats being posted here might just save someones life

Regarding the effectiveness of marijuana oil in the treatment of cancer there seems to be science behind it and also plenty of testimonies from people who have been cured by using it

So my advice is to anyone who gets cancer: before you take a toxic cocktails of drugs (chemotherapy) from your doctor (who is financially tied to big pharma) consider trying the natural approach of marijuana oil....what have you got to lose?

 

[Flavus Aquila]

What matters is not: can flavus aquila score some debating points againt muir? (as part of some little ego struggle)

What matters is: is the information that muir is posting here true?

Because statistically 1 in 3 of us is going to get cancer and 1 in 4 of us is going to die from it

If you look at the number of people who overtime might read this thread there is a high chance that one of them will get cancer or know someone who gets cancer

Now if they read this thread and find that there are alternative cures that their mainstream doctor is not telling them about then they have the option of trying those cures before going down the extremely harmful chemotherapy route

Whats being posted here might just save someones life

Regarding the effectiveness of marijuana oil in the treatment of cancer there seems to be science behind it and also plenty of testimonies from people who have been cured by using it

So my advice is to anyone who gets cancer: before you take a toxic cocktails of drugs (chemotherapy) from your doctor (who is financially tied to big pharma) consider trying the natural approach of marijuana oil....what have you got to lose?

What have you got to lose?

If one wastes time with marijuana oil, snake oil, or any other oil, it gives the cancer time to spread. Moreover, giving someone who is already stressed a psychoactive drug can easily precipitate a mental health crisis, such a paranoia, schizophrenia, delusional breaks, etc.

 

[muir]

What have you got to lose?

If one wastes time with marijuana oil, snake oil, or any other oil, it gives the cancer time to spread. Moreover, giving someone who is already stressed a psychoactive drug can easily precipitate a mental health crisis, such a paranoia, schizophrenia, delusional breaks, etc.

I wouldn't recommend snake oil

Marijuana oil on the other hand has a long and established track record of being an effective medicine

The oil needn't be used in psychoactive form but can be medicine grade

Going by the testimonials it doesn't sound like it takes long to see benefits from taking it so its time well spent. It won't have any negative side effects....chemotherapy on the other hand is guaranteed to make you sick and statistically is most likely to FAIL

[video=youtube;ypJ-YWNWthE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypJ-YWNWthE[/video]

 

[dogman6126]

Sooo....here's some real science making a huge jump in effectiveness in cancer treatment. I only just recently heard about it but it was published like 2 or 3 weeks ago.

Here's the full article and link.

New nanotech invention improves effectiveness of the 'penicillin of cancer'
By Jared Sagoff • August 13, 2014










inShare.
EmailPrint




ARGONNE, Ill. – Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory have added a new weapon to oncologists’ arsenal of anti-cancer therapies.

By combining magnetic nanoparticles with one of the most common and effective chemotherapy drugs, Argonne researchers have created a way to deliver anti-cancer drugs directly into the nucleus of cancer cells.

Researchers at Argonne’s Center for Nanoscale Materials and oncologists at the University of Chicago created nano-sized bubbles, or “micelles,” that contained two ingredients at their centers: magnetic nanoparticles of iron oxide and cisplatin, a conventional chemotherapy drug also known as “the penicillin of cancer.”

Cisplatin works by directly blocking DNA replication within the cancer cell. However, in order to work, the cisplatin has to make it from the bloodstream through the somewhat rigid barrier of the cell membrane.

“When someone is given a dose of chemotherapy, typically much of the drug doesn’t actually make it into the cancer cells. In addition, some cancer patients are sensitive to this drug due to impaired kidney function,” said oncologist Ezra Cohen, an author of the study. “This new method gives a way of delivering the dose of therapeutic cargo much more directly, which will enable us to have the same overall effect with a lower total dose, reducing the unpleasant and dangerous side effects of chemotherapy.”

“This technique could potentially allow us to increase the proportion of cisplatin in cancer cells by a hundredfold, making it that much more effective a chemotherapeutic agent,” he added.

Like the membranes of cancer cells themselves, the micelles are made up of a polymer material whose outer surfaces are hydrophilic, which means they are attracted to water, while the inner parts are hydrophobic, repelling water. “In addition, the surface of micelles can be equipped with targeting molecules capable of recognizing malignancy,” said Argonne nanoscientist Elena Rozhkova, lead author of the study.

Rozhkova and her colleagues still needed a way to get the cisplatin into the nucleus of the cancer cell after the micelle had attached to it. To do so, they also encapsulated iron oxide nanoparticles within the micelle along with the cisplatin. These nanoparticles served as tiny “heaters” that were turned on by an applied magnetic field, which caused the micelle container to collapse and release the cisplatin.

This was not the first time scientists had used applied nanomagnetic heat sources as a way to attack cancer cells, but the more targeted approach of the micelles allowed the researchers to use a much lower amount of heat and much less magnetic material, thereby risking less damage to healthy cells.

In order to see the action of the nanoparticles and cisplatin as the micelle collapsed, the researchers used the Hard X-Ray Nanoprobe at Argonne’s Advanced Photon Source. “Normally, it’s difficult to see how cisplatin is delivered into organelles like the nucleus, but with this technology we can see simultaneously how the drug delivery happens, how the nanoparticles interact with the cell’s membrane and the cell’s response,” said Argonne nanoscientist Volker Rose.

The study, entitled “Efficient cisplatin pro-drug delivery visualized with sub-100 nm resolution: interfacing engineered thermosensitive magnetomicelles with a living system,” appeared online in the June 6 issue of Advanced Materials Interfaces.

The materials characterization and synthesis work was performed at the Center for Nanoscale Materials and the Advanced Photon Source, both DOE Office of Science User Facilities. The medical aspects of the research, including animal studies, were supported by the University of Chicago.

Argonne National Laboratory seeks solutions to pressing national problems in science and technology. The nation's first national laboratory, Argonne conducts leading-edge basic and applied scientific research in virtually every scientific discipline. Argonne researchers work closely with researchers from hundreds of companies, universities, and federal, state and municipal agencies to help them solve their specific problems, advance America's scientific leadership and prepare the nation for a better future. With employees from more than 60 nations, Argonne is managed by UChicago Argonne, LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science. For more visit www.anl.gov. DOE’s Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States, and is working to address some of the most pressing challenges of our time. For more information, please visit science.energy.gov.

The Center for Nanoscale Materials at Argonne National Laboratory is one of the five DOE Nanoscale Science Research Centers (NSRCs), premier national user facilities for interdisciplinary research at the nanoscale, supported by the DOE Office of Science. Together the NSRCs comprise a suite of complementary facilities that provide researchers with state-of-the-art capabilities to fabricate, process, characterize and model nanoscale materials, and constitute the largest infrastructure investment of the National Nanotechnology Initiative. The NSRCs are located at DOE’s Argonne, Brookhaven, Lawrence Berkeley, Oak Ridge and Sandia and Los Alamos National Laboratories. For more information about the DOE NSRCs, please visit the Office of Science website.

The Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Laboratory is one of five national synchrotron radiation light sources supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science to carry out applied and basic research to understand, predict, and ultimately control matter and energy at the electronic, atomic, and molecular levels, provide the foundations for new energy technologies, and support DOE missions in energy, environment, and national security. To learn more about the Office of Science X-ray user facilities, visit the user facilities directory.

http://www.anl.gov/articles/new-nan...il&utm_term=0_fc4b7a30df-1a441f23a8-236833889

 

[dudemanbro]

I have heard very good testimonies given by - as far as I can recall - three different people I know regarding treatments such as the Gerson method, though usually the methods necessary are less radical than Gerson's. In fact, my own grandfather also cured his prostate cancer by implementing Gerson therapeutic methods into his lifestyle. Yes, it may involve coffee and butts, plus a major change in diet. But it is worth it, and having never been through chemo, and still having hair, my ESTP grandfather can continue to kick ass. Also, our family gained many new sources for organic foods.

That a lower pH in the body can make such a difference makes me feel dismayed when I see so many advertisements for cancer treatment fundraisers. Instead of destroying the body to possibly cure the disease, one should first consider changing the physiological environment of the body. It can be quite disillusioning to realize how intense the propaganda is, coming from conglomerate legal and medical organizations.

 

[dogman6126]

Gerson Method

Proponents of the Gerson diet claim that cancer can be cured only if toxins are eliminated from the body. They recommend "detoxification" with frequent coffee enemas and a low-sodium diet that includes more than a gallon a day of juices made from fruits, vegetables, and raw calf's liver. This method was developed by Max Gerson, a German-born physician who emigrated to the United States in 1936 and practiced in New York City until his death in 1959. Gerson therapy is still available at Hospital Meridien in Tijuana, Mexico and, since February 1997, at the Gerson Healing Center in Sedona, Arizona.

Gerson therapy is still actively promoted by his daughter, Charlotte Gerson, through lectures, talk show appearances, and publications of the Gerson Institute in Bonita, California. Gerson protocols have included liver extract injections, ozone enemas, "live cell therapy," thyroid tablets, royal jelly capsules, linseed oil, castor oil enemas, clay packs, laetrile, and vaccines made from influenza virus and killed Staphylococcus aureus bacteria.

In 1947, the NCI reviewed ten cases selected by Dr. Gerson and found his report unconvincing. That same year, a committee appointed by the New York County Medical Society reviewed records of 86 patients, examined ten patients, and found no evidence that the Gerson method had value in treating cancer. An NCI analysis of Dr. Gerson's book A Cancer Therapy: Results of Fifty Cases concluded in 1959 that most of the cases failed to meet the criteria (such as histologic verification of cancer) for proper evaluation of a cancer case [16]. A recent review of the Gerson treatment rationale concluded: (a) the "poisons" Gerson claimed to be present in processed foods have never been identified, (b) frequent coffee enemas have never been shown to mobilize and remove poisons from the liver and intestines of cancer patients, (c) there is no evidence that any such poisons are related to the onset of cancer, (d) there is no evidence that a "healing" inflammatory reaction exists that can seek out and kill cancer cells [17].

Between 1980 and 1986 at least 13 patients treated with Gerson therapy were admitted to San Diego area hospitals with Campylobacter fetus sepsis attributable to the liver injections [18]. None of the patients was cancer-free, and one died of his malignancy within a week. Five were comatose due to low serum sodium levels, presumably as a result of the "no sodium" Gerson dietary regimen. As a result, Gerson personnel modified their techniques for handling raw liver products and biologicals. However, the Gerson approach still has considerable potential for harm. Deaths also have been attributed to the coffee enemas administered at the Tijuana clinic.

Charlotte Gerson claims that treatment at the clinic has produced high cure rates for many cancers. In 1986, however, investigators learned that patients were not monitored after they left the facility [19]. Although clinic personnel later said they would follow their patients systematically, there is no published evidence that they have done so. Three naturpaths who visited the Gerson Clinic in 1983 were able to track 18 patients over a 5-year period (or until death) through annual letters or phone calls. At the 5-year mark, only one was still alive (but not cancer-free); the rest had succumbed to their cancer [20].

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/cancer.html

Let’s review a bit about just what the Gerson therapy is. It’s a so-called “nutritional” therapy for cancer that involves consuming large quantities of fruit and vegetable juices, raw liver, coupled with a “detoxification” regime that involves frequent coffee enemas. It is described thusly on the movie’s website:


The Gerson Therapy is a powerful, natural treatment that boosts your body’s own immune system to heal cancer, arthritis, heart disease, allergies and many other degenerative diseases. One aspect of the Gerson Therapy that sets it apart from most other treatment methods is its all-encompassing nature. An abundance of nutrients from thirteen fresh, organic juices is consumed every day, providing your body with a super dose of enzymes, minerals and nutrients. These substances then break down diseased tissue in the body, while enemas aid in eliminating the lifelong buildup of toxins from the liver.

With its whole-body approach to healing, the Gerson Therapy naturally reactivates your bodys magnificent ability to heal itself with no damaging side-effects. Over 200 articles in respected medical literature and thousands of people cured of their incurable diseases document the Gerson Therapy’s effectiveness. The Gerson Therapy is one of the few treatments to have a 60 year history of success.

Although its philosophy of cleansing and reactivating the body is simple, the Gerson Therapy is a complex method of treatment requiring significant attention to detail. While many patients have made full recoveries practicing the Gerson Therapy on their own, for best results it is recommended to begin treatment at a Gerson Institute licensed treatment center. For more information, visit www.gerson.org.

All the usual buzz words are there, the “naturalness” of it (although I’ve never been able to figure out how advocates of these sorts of “natural detoxification” regimens can think that pumping coffee up one’s posterior is in any way “natural”); the vague and scientifically meaningless “boosting the immune system” claim; and, above all, the “detoxification” claim. Apparently believers in the Gerson therapy (not to mention many other forms of “alternative medicine,” believe that our bodies (and colons) are packed with hideous toxins that are making us ill. Once again, how shoving coffee up one’s posterior removes “toxins” I fail to understand, but then I’m thinking about this scientifically rather than religiously. Adherents who believe in detoxification appear to me to do so more out of a belief analogous to religion that they are “unclean” and need “purification,” much the same way that some fundamentalist Muslims engage in ritual self-flagellation or the manner in which in Christian religions Baptism is believed to cleanse the soul. The Gerson protocol provides that “purification,” just as a wide variety of “colon cleansers” and “liver flushes” beloved of “alternative medicine” mavens. Unfortunately, they do not work against cancer and can lead to delays in treatment and, even worse, can rob patients with fatal cancer of effective palliation when they usurp scientific medicine.

Actually, the Gerson protocol was a precursor to the now more commonly discussed and more (in)famous Gonzalez protocol, which my co-blogger Dr. Kimball Atwood IV deconstructed in such exquisite detail over the course of several posts right here on this very blog a while back (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6). Grafted onto the therapy by his daughter Charlotte since Max Gerson’s death have been other forms of woo, such as liver extract injections, ozone enemas, “live cell therapy,” thyroid tablets, castor oil enemas, clay packs, laetrile, and “vaccines” made from influenza virus and killed Staphylococcus aureus bacteria. Gerson’s “evidence” in the form of his case series was examined by the National Cancer Institute back in the 1950s, and this is what was found:


In 1947, the NCI reviewed ten cases selected by Dr. Gerson and found his report unconvincing. That same year, a committee appointed by the New York County Medical Society reviewed records of 86 patients, examined ten patients, and found no evidence that the Gerson method had value in treating cancer. An NCI analysis of Dr. Gerson’s book A Cancer Therapy: Results of Fifty Cases concluded in 1959 that most of the cases failed to meet the criteria (such as histologic verification of cancer) for proper evaluation of a cancer case [16]. A recent review of the Gerson treatment rationale concluded: (a) the “poisons” Gerson claimed to be present in processed foods have never been identified, (b) frequent coffee enemas have never been shown to mobilize and remove poisons from the liver and intestines of cancer patients, (c) there is no evidence that any such poisons are related to the onset of cancer, (d) there is no evidence that a “healing” inflammatory reaction exists that can seek out and kill cancer cells [17].

And:


Charlotte Gerson claims that treatment at the clinic has produced high cure rates for many cancers. In 1986, however, investigators learned that patients were not monitored after they left the facility [19]. Although clinic personnel later said they would follow their patients systematically, there is no published evidence that they have done so. A naturopath who visited the Gerson Clinic in 1983 was able to track 21 patients over a 5-year period (or until death) through annual letters or phone calls. At the 5-year mark, only one was still alive (but not cancer-free); the rest had succumbed to their cancer [20].

The cancer doctor in me knows that this is pretty much what would be expected if one were to follow 21 patients with advanced cancer who were being given no treatment. The exact timeframe for their deaths would vary depending upon the mix of cancers, but one could be pretty confident that very few, if any, of them would be alive after five years–or even two or three years. Moreover, because the Gerson regimen, like the Gonzalez regimen, is quite onerous and difficult to follow, only patients in relatively good shape to begin with can follow it, thus selecting for patients more likely to live longer with their metastatic cancer anyway

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...about-the-gerson-therapy-and-cancer-quackery/


I don't have any information about your grandfathers case, but this is information about the Gerson method when scientifically approached.