Anybody tried maple syrup/baking soda (Na Bicarb)?
Comments
-
ManWithoutColonCancermanwithnoname said:Facts...
First lets put to rest the 'fungus theory' no one is taking that seriously, and no one is talking about 'diet' and Ph.
"The Facts: " While these findings are accurate, they apply only
to cells in an isolated lab setting"
That's just not true is it. Read the PDF I posted.
"One won't know unless one tries, ehh?" exactly, that is a real scientific experiment.
The only 'snake oil' I would try better have some real evidence behind it, I'm not interested in woo.
Really? You are the "woo" king. We bow to your "wooness" and take everything you say, with a grain...no let me rephrase that, with NO grains of salt, not even worthy of a grain at times, that they are so far fetched.
I know that I rarely respond to anything you say, because well, I don't respect much of anything you have to say, because it is so full of "woo" as you put it.
But I do respect John, and his facts more fully then your "woo" made up stuff. When you or any of yours gets colon cancer, and you choose to discuss that, maybe we can have a meaningful conversation, but...Brain cancer and colon cancer are on completely and hugely DIFFERENT spheres that it really is pointless to discuss much of anything with you, it's as if we are on completely different planets, which leads me to reason as to why on CSN there is a discussion group for Breast Cancer, BRAIN cancer, CHILDHOOD cancers, Uterine cancer,lung cancer etc.., all SEPARATE from each other because each cancer is different, chemos, cures (if possible), therapies, symptoms are all different. Colon cancer is NOT the same as brain cancer, the chemo's, the protocol's the surgeries are ALL DIFFERENT. Colon cancer is NOT the same as breast cancer, the chemo's the protocol's the surgeries are ALL DIFFERENT. Colon cancer is not the same as melanoma cancer, the chemo's the protocol's the surgeries are ALL DIFFERENT, the list goes on.
Yet, you feel the need, to say you aren't a "woo" king, but you only discuss alternatives as if they are the only way to go, and as if BRAIN cancer alternatives are the same as COLON alternatives, ONE SIZE does not fit all. I would have had some respect for you if you had gone to the brain cancer or children cancer boards, but you have never even done that, for some strange reason you choose to only visit our (that would be us, the people with colon cancer) board and push your "woo" on us.0 -
manwithnoname -manwithnoname said:Facts...
First lets put to rest the 'fungus theory' no one is taking that seriously, and no one is talking about 'diet' and Ph.
"The Facts: " While these findings are accurate, they apply only
to cells in an isolated lab setting"
That's just not true is it. Read the PDF I posted.
"One won't know unless one tries, ehh?" exactly, that is a real scientific experiment.
The only 'snake oil' I would try better have some real evidence behind it, I'm not interested in woo.
Facts?
Re:
" "The Facts: " While these findings are accurate, they apply only
to cells in an isolated lab setting"
That's just not true is it. Read the PDF I posted."
Ok. "Not true".
But it should be pointed out, that the sentence:
"While these findings are accurate, they apply only to cells in an isolated lab setting. "
are a direct quote from these know-nothing people:
Busting Cancer Myths: Acidic Foods and Cancer Risks
By the American Institute for Cancer Research
as reproduced here: http://foodconsumer.org - Busting_Cancer_Myths
Ignoring factual biological information doesn't serve anyone well.
There isn't any one of us here that desires to waste time while
cancer grows within. There are some things that can slow or stop
that growth, and some things that don't do much but waste time
and empty pockets.
If nearly four thousand years of use by literally billions of people
does not matter, then it does not to those that refuse to hear or read.
Ignorance is not a virtue. The willful desire to ignore facts from
one's selective beliefs, usually ends up with a not so selective finale'.
The real information is always available; one just has to dig deeper
to find it.
I truly hope you find what you are looking for!
My very best wishes are for you and yours.
John0 -
Steve -steved said:Bicarbonate
Getting back on the topic I thought the main basis that alkalinisation was promoted historically was the dubious claim that cancers arise from fungal, especially candida, infections. Had a look around and there is no decent evidence to support it scientifically but it is used including arterially into vessels leading to tumours. The main advocate I see is dr simoncini whose website is worth reading with a critical eye http://www.curenaturalicancro.com/
One of the best balanced bits of info on bicarbonate I found was this acs site at http://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatmentsandsideeffects/complementaryandalternativemedicine/herbsvitaminsandminerals/sodium-bicarbonate
Not something I would consider I've or arterially. Orally I have no doubt is entirely homeopathic as the body is too good at regulating ph to make a difference.
Steve
Re:
"Not something I would consider I've or arterially. Orally I
have no doubt is entirely homeopathic as the body is too good at
regulating ph to make a difference"
Well said.
It's scary to read comments like this:
"....there appears to actually be a few doctors using catheter delivery of Na Bicarb to treat cancer.....
... Extremely simple, cheap to try, and very likely not to cause any harm. I'm thinking of giving this a try....."
Pumping Bicarb (and/or maple syrup?) into one's veins just does not
seem like a very good idea to me. I hope Tedd re-thinks this.
My best,
John0 -
Please show me where Im 'pushing woo'herdizziness said:ManWithoutColonCancer
Really? You are the "woo" king. We bow to your "wooness" and take everything you say, with a grain...no let me rephrase that, with NO grains of salt, not even worthy of a grain at times, that they are so far fetched.
I know that I rarely respond to anything you say, because well, I don't respect much of anything you have to say, because it is so full of "woo" as you put it.
But I do respect John, and his facts more fully then your "woo" made up stuff. When you or any of yours gets colon cancer, and you choose to discuss that, maybe we can have a meaningful conversation, but...Brain cancer and colon cancer are on completely and hugely DIFFERENT spheres that it really is pointless to discuss much of anything with you, it's as if we are on completely different planets, which leads me to reason as to why on CSN there is a discussion group for Breast Cancer, BRAIN cancer, CHILDHOOD cancers, Uterine cancer,lung cancer etc.., all SEPARATE from each other because each cancer is different, chemos, cures (if possible), therapies, symptoms are all different. Colon cancer is NOT the same as brain cancer, the chemo's, the protocol's the surgeries are ALL DIFFERENT. Colon cancer is NOT the same as breast cancer, the chemo's the protocol's the surgeries are ALL DIFFERENT. Colon cancer is not the same as melanoma cancer, the chemo's the protocol's the surgeries are ALL DIFFERENT, the list goes on.
Yet, you feel the need, to say you aren't a "woo" king, but you only discuss alternatives as if they are the only way to go, and as if BRAIN cancer alternatives are the same as COLON alternatives, ONE SIZE does not fit all. I would have had some respect for you if you had gone to the brain cancer or children cancer boards, but you have never even done that, for some strange reason you choose to only visit our (that would be us, the people with colon cancer) board and push your "woo" on us.
As I have said to you before, put up or shut up.
I have already told you start your own forum then you will have TOTAL control, doesn't that sound good?
You will also see that I HAVE posted on the brain tumour forum, pretty poor place, not much info.
Im also a member of ependyparents.org, for my non-existent son's brain tumour, why don't you join and check, you check everything else about me.
Now ALL those cancers you mentioned can spread to the BRAIN, and Ive told you I ain't here for the hugs, it's the info.
Which reminds me, thanks for the heads up on the Hydrazine sulphate John23, pretty poor for colorectal but seems to be potent for brain tumours.
"for some strange reason you choose to only visit our board" Winter, I visit the brain tumour board DAILY as who ever runs this place can testify to. I ended up here for Pete's Gc-maf experiment, you have a very short term memory...
Here's the thing lady, if I wanted to 'push' anything here I would have joined as a 63 year old woman called Marge from Ohio with grade IV CRC, have a nice avatar with a puppy or some kittens then after a few months of sending people 'wishes and hugs' post how my CEA has gone down after taking some miraculous supplement with an affiliate link hidden in it. ( Google affiliate coz Im sure you don't know what it is )
Now when I joined here YOU didn't have ANY cancer so why were you here? and since I have joined you have accused me of being an 'industry shill' stealing someone else's 'cancer story' 'kiddie cancer fraud' lying several times and 'pushing woo' several times.
When really ALL I have done is disagreed with your precious opinion.
I have been warned by several members what you are like and oh how right they were, maybe you will get rid of me is with the apology YOU OWE ME.
hugs, Tony
P.s thanks for the cancer lesson.0 -
John Im only interested in facts.John23 said:manwithnoname -
Facts?
Re:
" "The Facts: " While these findings are accurate, they apply only
to cells in an isolated lab setting"
That's just not true is it. Read the PDF I posted."
Ok. "Not true".
But it should be pointed out, that the sentence:
"While these findings are accurate, they apply only to cells in an isolated lab setting. "
are a direct quote from these know-nothing people:
Busting Cancer Myths: Acidic Foods and Cancer Risks
By the American Institute for Cancer Research
as reproduced here: http://foodconsumer.org - Busting_Cancer_Myths
Ignoring factual biological information doesn't serve anyone well.
There isn't any one of us here that desires to waste time while
cancer grows within. There are some things that can slow or stop
that growth, and some things that don't do much but waste time
and empty pockets.
If nearly four thousand years of use by literally billions of people
does not matter, then it does not to those that refuse to hear or read.
Ignorance is not a virtue. The willful desire to ignore facts from
one's selective beliefs, usually ends up with a not so selective finale'.
The real information is always available; one just has to dig deeper
to find it.
I truly hope you find what you are looking for!
My very best wishes are for you and yours.
John
Now you posted a link to some food site about diet and Ph, I agree, but that is different to putting a huge (12gm) amount of an alkalising chemical into your body.
The fact is bicarbonate has reduced the amount of metastatic cancer in mice, that's all Im saying, nothing about humans and the fact is I can't find ANY data to show it does the same.
"Relying on this type of treatment alone and avoiding or delaying conventional medical care for cancer may have serious health consequences"
The above statement is about TCM from Cancer.org, I am smart enough to take that with a pinch of salt and I'm very glad it worked for you, as Phil keeps saying " what works for you might not work for me" but as far as I am concerned there is NOT enough information to make an accurate assessment on high dose oral or IV bicarbonate at this time. More work is needed.0 -
Dear Tony .... pleasemanwithnoname said:Please show me where Im 'pushing woo'
As I have said to you before, put up or shut up.
I have already told you start your own forum then you will have TOTAL control, doesn't that sound good?
You will also see that I HAVE posted on the brain tumour forum, pretty poor place, not much info.
Im also a member of ependyparents.org, for my non-existent son's brain tumour, why don't you join and check, you check everything else about me.
Now ALL those cancers you mentioned can spread to the BRAIN, and Ive told you I ain't here for the hugs, it's the info.
Which reminds me, thanks for the heads up on the Hydrazine sulphate John23, pretty poor for colorectal but seems to be potent for brain tumours.
"for some strange reason you choose to only visit our board" Winter, I visit the brain tumour board DAILY as who ever runs this place can testify to. I ended up here for Pete's Gc-maf experiment, you have a very short term memory...
Here's the thing lady, if I wanted to 'push' anything here I would have joined as a 63 year old woman called Marge from Ohio with grade IV CRC, have a nice avatar with a puppy or some kittens then after a few months of sending people 'wishes and hugs' post how my CEA has gone down after taking some miraculous supplement with an affiliate link hidden in it. ( Google affiliate coz Im sure you don't know what it is )
Now when I joined here YOU didn't have ANY cancer so why were you here? and since I have joined you have accused me of being an 'industry shill' stealing someone else's 'cancer story' 'kiddie cancer fraud' lying several times and 'pushing woo' several times.
When really ALL I have done is disagreed with your precious opinion.
I have been warned by several members what you are like and oh how right they were, maybe you will get rid of me is with the apology YOU OWE ME.
hugs, Tony
P.s thanks for the cancer lesson.
I know that you and your family must be under tremendous pressure and grief to see your child experience brain cancer.
My own brother died of a glioblastoma only four short months after its discovery.
I have never doubted you nor your son's condition.
I read your posts with interest and with an open mind ... but ...
is there any way that you can disagree with Winter Marie and others that might have differences of opinion without being so mean-spirited?
It is so disheartening to come to the board and feel the anger.
Can you find a way to let the anger go?
We need you and your opinions, but not your anger.
There are so many people struggling here daily and we come together to support one another.
If you have an issue with one or two members, maybe it would be best to just not respond? Why keep it all going? What is accomplished?
There are so many people here who are sad, some dying ... why waste precious moments of your time or anyone else's with the anger?
I wish you and your family the best. I wish Winter Marie the best. I wish everyone peace and courage and strength and kindness.
Sincerely,
Cynthia -- a 60 year old woman from Michigan with a nice avatar of a puppy who does wish everyone wishes and hugs
0 -
Quark theoryherdizziness said:ManWithoutColonCancer
Really? You are the "woo" king. We bow to your "wooness" and take everything you say, with a grain...no let me rephrase that, with NO grains of salt, not even worthy of a grain at times, that they are so far fetched.
I know that I rarely respond to anything you say, because well, I don't respect much of anything you have to say, because it is so full of "woo" as you put it.
But I do respect John, and his facts more fully then your "woo" made up stuff. When you or any of yours gets colon cancer, and you choose to discuss that, maybe we can have a meaningful conversation, but...Brain cancer and colon cancer are on completely and hugely DIFFERENT spheres that it really is pointless to discuss much of anything with you, it's as if we are on completely different planets, which leads me to reason as to why on CSN there is a discussion group for Breast Cancer, BRAIN cancer, CHILDHOOD cancers, Uterine cancer,lung cancer etc.., all SEPARATE from each other because each cancer is different, chemos, cures (if possible), therapies, symptoms are all different. Colon cancer is NOT the same as brain cancer, the chemo's, the protocol's the surgeries are ALL DIFFERENT. Colon cancer is NOT the same as breast cancer, the chemo's the protocol's the surgeries are ALL DIFFERENT. Colon cancer is not the same as melanoma cancer, the chemo's the protocol's the surgeries are ALL DIFFERENT, the list goes on.
Yet, you feel the need, to say you aren't a "woo" king, but you only discuss alternatives as if they are the only way to go, and as if BRAIN cancer alternatives are the same as COLON alternatives, ONE SIZE does not fit all. I would have had some respect for you if you had gone to the brain cancer or children cancer boards, but you have never even done that, for some strange reason you choose to only visit our (that would be us, the people with colon cancer) board and push your "woo" on us.
I think manwithnoname could do a better job "connecting the dots" to CRC and presenting acceptable, relevant studies for support. While there are subjects that I think are largely a waste of time, it may be important that we try to examine old chestnuts and controversies carefully, analytically. Too often, epithets like "quackery" and "woo" have been used as means to quash treatments that had merit, where life or major changes hung in the balance. I've run across several of these in the last 10 years.
Marie's "cancers,.., all SEPARATE from each other because each cancer is different" is not correct in the sense of total "SEPARATE" independence. Already there is significant known overlap between cancers based on molecular pathways, biomarkers and targeted treatments in common.
In the 1950s, physicists were going nuts over the classification of hundreds of new particles. Eventually the rise of quark theory could explain these particles in terms of combinations of 6 basic quarks.
Similarly there is a lot of overlap between cancers that can already be described, and treated, in terms of cells with different combinations of common, aberrant molecular pathways, and common treatment components.0 -
Your right Tanstanstaafl said:Quark theory
I think manwithnoname could do a better job "connecting the dots" to CRC and presenting acceptable, relevant studies for support. While there are subjects that I think are largely a waste of time, it may be important that we try to examine old chestnuts and controversies carefully, analytically. Too often, epithets like "quackery" and "woo" have been used as means to quash treatments that had merit, where life or major changes hung in the balance. I've run across several of these in the last 10 years.
Marie's "cancers,.., all SEPARATE from each other because each cancer is different" is not correct in the sense of total "SEPARATE" independence. Already there is significant known overlap between cancers based on molecular pathways, biomarkers and targeted treatments in common.
In the 1950s, physicists were going nuts over the classification of hundreds of new particles. Eventually the rise of quark theory could explain these particles in terms of combinations of 6 basic quarks.
Similarly there is a lot of overlap between cancers that can already be described, and treated, in terms of cells with different combinations of common, aberrant molecular pathways, and common treatment components.
I can do a better job...the only separation is the blood brain barrier.
currently my son takes a breast cancer chemo and a sarcoma chemo, along with an arthritis drug an epileptic drug a cholesterol lowering drug and a diabetic drug, topped off with a chicken virus and washed down with a hormone.
All these to target certain pathways, some of which are very relevant to CRC (and many other cancers.)
So you like quantum mechanics? we have Schrodinger's cat on the 6th Nov. already getting nervous.
No point in finding relevant studies, I have tried posting, WM never reads any.0 -
Dear Tony ...pleaseJohn23 said:For what it's worth
Although I hate chemicals, I do have two bottles of hydrazine sulfate on hand.
I paid a whopping $30 per bottle back in 2007, and that's enough for the
full treatment, if I decided that nothing else is working..
The Syracuse Cancer Research Institute
The Truth About Hydrazine Sulfate
Among the "alternative" choices, there are very few chemicals included.
Reading at the link included may offer some hope for those who
conventional medicine has failed, and who chooses not to try non-chemicals.
I really don't have much faith in some of the alternatives offered,
or talked about here. But of course, that's -my- choice, and
we all should make our own choices.
There are many opinions out there; it should be kept in mind,
that even the best physicians can only offer their personal opinion.
Hopes for better health,
John
I know that you and your family must be under tremendous pressure and grief to see your child experience brain cancer.
My own brother died of a glioblastoma only four short months after its discovery.
I have never doubted you nor your son's condition.
I read your posts with interest and with an open mind ... but ...
is there any way that you can disagree with Winter Marie and others that might have differences of opinion without being so mean-spirited?
It is so disheartening to come to the board and feel the anger.
Can you find a way to let the anger go?
We need you and your opinions, but not your anger.
There are so many people struggling here daily and we come together to support one another.
If you have an issue with one or two members, maybe it would be best to just not respond? Why keep it all going? What is accomplished?
There are so many people here who are sad, some dying ... why waste precious moments of your time or anyone else's with the anger?
I wish you and your family the best. I wish Winter Marie the best. I wish everyone peace and courage and strength and kindness.
Sincerely,
Cynthia -- a 60 year old woman from Michigan with a nice avatar of a puppy who does wish everyone wishes and hugs 0 -
Hi Cynthiadevotion10 said:Dear Tony .... please
I know that you and your family must be under tremendous pressure and grief to see your child experience brain cancer.
My own brother died of a glioblastoma only four short months after its discovery.
I have never doubted you nor your son's condition.
I read your posts with interest and with an open mind ... but ...
is there any way that you can disagree with Winter Marie and others that might have differences of opinion without being so mean-spirited?
It is so disheartening to come to the board and feel the anger.
Can you find a way to let the anger go?
We need you and your opinions, but not your anger.
There are so many people struggling here daily and we come together to support one another.
If you have an issue with one or two members, maybe it would be best to just not respond? Why keep it all going? What is accomplished?
There are so many people here who are sad, some dying ... why waste precious moments of your time or anyone else's with the anger?
I wish you and your family the best. I wish Winter Marie the best. I wish everyone peace and courage and strength and kindness.
Sincerely,
Cynthia -- a 60 year old woman from Michigan with a nice avatar of a puppy who does wish everyone wishes and hugs
I have asked Winter several times in other threads to 'let it go' and not attack me.
Im sorry I find it very difficult not to respond when it's a PERSONAL attack and not about my opinion, and the only person who is making me angry is Winter.
However for the sake of all I will do my best to ignore her and her opinions. I promise.
Now maybe you can influence Winter to let it go.
Sorry about your brother, it couldn't have been easy.
Tony0 -
Thank you for your response Tonymanwithnoname said:Hi Cynthia
I have asked Winter several times in other threads to 'let it go' and not attack me.
Im sorry I find it very difficult not to respond when it's a PERSONAL attack and not about my opinion, and the only person who is making me angry is Winter.
However for the sake of all I will do my best to ignore her and her opinions. I promise.
Now maybe you can influence Winter to let it go.
Sorry about your brother, it couldn't have been easy.
Tony
I am holding you to your promise to try to not get so riled up
I think you mean well, but I also think Winter Marie does too.
Cancer and disease and stress and desperation change us all and it is often not easy to stay calm in this storm.
Yes, my brother's passing was tough. His own daughter died of leukemia at age six.
You know in the southern part of the US where I am originally from there is an expression "you catch more flies with honey".
Stay sweet and we will be able to hear you better.
Again, thank you for your response.
Cynthia0 -
Sorry for the double postdevotion10 said:Dear Tony ...please
I know that you and your family must be under tremendous pressure and grief to see your child experience brain cancer.
My own brother died of a glioblastoma only four short months after its discovery.
I have never doubted you nor your son's condition.
I read your posts with interest and with an open mind ... but ...
is there any way that you can disagree with Winter Marie and others that might have differences of opinion without being so mean-spirited?
It is so disheartening to come to the board and feel the anger.
Can you find a way to let the anger go?
We need you and your opinions, but not your anger.
There are so many people struggling here daily and we come together to support one another.
If you have an issue with one or two members, maybe it would be best to just not respond? Why keep it all going? What is accomplished?
There are so many people here who are sad, some dying ... why waste precious moments of your time or anyone else's with the anger?
I wish you and your family the best. I wish Winter Marie the best. I wish everyone peace and courage and strength and kindness.
Sincerely,
Cynthia -- a 60 year old woman from Michigan with a nice avatar of a puppy who does wish everyone wishes and hugs
Tony and I had communication further up the page.0 -
summarized repostsmanwithnoname said:Your right Tans
I can do a better job...the only separation is the blood brain barrier.
currently my son takes a breast cancer chemo and a sarcoma chemo, along with an arthritis drug an epileptic drug a cholesterol lowering drug and a diabetic drug, topped off with a chicken virus and washed down with a hormone.
All these to target certain pathways, some of which are very relevant to CRC (and many other cancers.)
So you like quantum mechanics? we have Schrodinger's cat on the 6th Nov. already getting nervous.
No point in finding relevant studies, I have tried posting, WM never reads any.
It might be useful to collate the redundant material and links in the "Blog" and "Resources" area so others can find them quickly. Then if WM hasn't read, understood or agreed with something, it becomes easier for others catch up and to form their own opinion without as much back and forth that gets bogged down in personalities.
Also succinct, polished summaries are more likely to be found, read and understood by more people with a better grasp of the overall picture and issues.0 -
Tanstallfltanstaafl said:Quark theory
I think manwithnoname could do a better job "connecting the dots" to CRC and presenting acceptable, relevant studies for support. While there are subjects that I think are largely a waste of time, it may be important that we try to examine old chestnuts and controversies carefully, analytically. Too often, epithets like "quackery" and "woo" have been used as means to quash treatments that had merit, where life or major changes hung in the balance. I've run across several of these in the last 10 years.
Marie's "cancers,.., all SEPARATE from each other because each cancer is different" is not correct in the sense of total "SEPARATE" independence. Already there is significant known overlap between cancers based on molecular pathways, biomarkers and targeted treatments in common.
In the 1950s, physicists were going nuts over the classification of hundreds of new particles. Eventually the rise of quark theory could explain these particles in terms of combinations of 6 basic quarks.
Similarly there is a lot of overlap between cancers that can already be described, and treated, in terms of cells with different combinations of common, aberrant molecular pathways, and common treatment components.
More info please, because I am a bit confused about this separate or not totally separate issue.
If the word "totally" is the key then I guess I agree since from what I have read cancers are caused by cells gone bad during division or failure to die in a normal fashion.
If they weren't separate wouldn't all be able to be treated with one chemo and all those treated have the same results from treatment? If they weren't separate why would there be a need to test tumors to find the chemo which would provide the best response?
I understand that some folks ( Pete and MWNN to name two ) do use some chemo's in an "off label" manner, but I have not read anywhere where chemo treatments are interchangable in the norm.
The only targeted treatment which comes to mind which crosses several different cancers is radiation. Can you give us some others?
If it were true that a cure for one cancer would cure all, that would be wonderful indeed.
Marie who loves kitties0 -
its such a big question for example my caseLovekitties said:Tanstallfl
More info please, because I am a bit confused about this separate or not totally separate issue.
If the word "totally" is the key then I guess I agree since from what I have read cancers are caused by cells gone bad during division or failure to die in a normal fashion.
If they weren't separate wouldn't all be able to be treated with one chemo and all those treated have the same results from treatment? If they weren't separate why would there be a need to test tumors to find the chemo which would provide the best response?
I understand that some folks ( Pete and MWNN to name two ) do use some chemo's in an "off label" manner, but I have not read anywhere where chemo treatments are interchangable in the norm.
The only targeted treatment which comes to mind which crosses several different cancers is radiation. Can you give us some others?
If it were true that a cure for one cancer would cure all, that would be wonderful indeed.
Marie who loves kitties
Dear Marie and all
how do you get good chemo to peritoneal mets direct injection.
so my removab use is offlabel, its like chemo in that it helps kill cancer cells and the side effects are supreme. it does not destroy your immune system like folfox etc, so I am playing the game of long term survival and i want acknowledge the compromise a short term high dose chemo maybe benefit some, but you see my MDR is 70%, that the multidrug resistance pathway in my tumour, so hardcore chemo well in my case why bother. being guided by the best science is all we can do and pray of course. after 6 month removab the express of my tumour biological markers can change considerably, so the suckers are slippery little devils to. I published all the greek test tumour results last december on my blog, goto blog search medical record and read the rgcc results about 4 documents.
beating cancer with nutrition by thomas someone. its a concise simple read. it covers lots of the pathways. i have had my tumour pathways analysed dec11, my mistake was hammering the tumour with well targetted naturals and not going hardcore jan feb 12 when my escalating markers with clear scans.
so now if i recover well enough from removab, then mitomycin, matiac d fraction and vit c in hyperthemia. the chemo is on a 24hour bottle, low dose to shutdown any circulating ctcs. this choice of chemo was guided by chemo sensitivity testing. why not use the most effective chemo for you tumour?
I will copy this into my removab post for any further discussion . my point is our tumours are unique but they all have different pathways, which can be targetted.
the point is our tumours all have common pathways which are uniquely expressed, just like we are unique, they exist in us, they are shaped by our environment, our ever changing environment, something as simple as deep breathing oxyganates our cellular metabolism and can encourage oxphos ADP not fermentation, but its very complex. read cancer as a metabolic disease for full details.
hugs,
pete0 -
My three cents?Lovekitties said:Tanstallfl
More info please, because I am a bit confused about this separate or not totally separate issue.
If the word "totally" is the key then I guess I agree since from what I have read cancers are caused by cells gone bad during division or failure to die in a normal fashion.
If they weren't separate wouldn't all be able to be treated with one chemo and all those treated have the same results from treatment? If they weren't separate why would there be a need to test tumors to find the chemo which would provide the best response?
I understand that some folks ( Pete and MWNN to name two ) do use some chemo's in an "off label" manner, but I have not read anywhere where chemo treatments are interchangable in the norm.
The only targeted treatment which comes to mind which crosses several different cancers is radiation. Can you give us some others?
If it were true that a cure for one cancer would cure all, that would be wonderful indeed.
Marie who loves kitties
Re:
"If they [cancer cells] weren't separate wouldn't all be able to be treated with
one chemo and all those treated have the same results from treatment?"
All cancer cells survive and live by the same means: the Fermentation process.
In that respect, -all- cancer cells are the same.
All the chemicals used for cancer therapy (chemo) will damage -any-
cancer cell to the point of it's death. Unfortunately, the chemicals will
also damage -any- cell as well. That's the reason every chemical
used for therapy (chemo) is considered a major carcinogenic substance.
So, if they all can kill cancer cells, why not one drug?
The problem is how to target the cancer cells specifically, without
damaging all the surrounding good cells that the cancer is among.
If the cancer began in the prostrate, it is likely a slow growing cancer.
That same cancer cell, metastasizing to the liver or lungs, will grow slower
than it's new surrounding cells, making the targeting of it more difficult
using present technology. So using genetic markers instead of glucose
sensitive products for targeting it, means that different chemicals have
to be adapted for that requirement.
Otherwise, the same chemical will kill any cancer cell, regardless where
it had it's beginning. One bullet fits all; it's how well you can aim it.
That make sense?
(That was a slight variation of how it was described to me years back).
My conclusion (and the one explaining it) was that there is too much
time being wasted on attempting to target powerful chemicals, when
they should be trying to figure out how to get the immune system to
do the job it should have been doing to prevent those damaged cells
from staying behind to begin with.
Not everyone gets cancer, and not everyone is so susceptible to what
are classified as "carcinogenic substances". Anything can be considered
carcinogenic if one's immune system allows a damaged, defective cell
to remain within us.
Immunotherapy makes more sense, than trying to selectivly target this
needle in the haystack. Our immune system is designed to address single cells.
All cancer cells begin the same way; trying to fight what it later becomes,
is just confusing the issue at hand. A good guy can become a killer,
does it take a different bullet to stop him at different times of his life?
Hopes for all, for better health,
John0 -
Tans said:" Already theredevotion10 said:Sorry for the double post
Tony and I had communication further up the page.
Tans said:
" Already there is significant known overlap between cancers based on molecular pathways, biomarkers and targeted treatments in common".
Manwithnoname states the different drugs his son is on ( I won't re-name them all again). But I was (am) interested in the different classifications.
Connecting the dots??? It's hard. But, this sort of makes me wonder about a clinical trial that I know a number of people are in. They stay at the place I stay at when I get treatment. It is a Phase 1, and people with different types of cancer are in the same trial. I'm sure it is individualized, but it shows that those doctors are treating different cancers based on the above - "because there is an overlap between cancers......"
I have been trying to get information from them (people in the trial). Since it is very early in the trial, there is obviously not a whole lot to go on. Everything has a start.
The trial is FDA-approved, not affiliated with one of the "big" places ( very possibly a good thing).
I won't get long-winded on this. But the little info I have heard has made me consider this as perhaps something I need to pursue......time is running out. The trial has a waiting list, so I may never know......
The only reason I came back to this topic, is from what Tans said, and then what Tony said his son was taking, and, the little that I know from that clinical trial ( and actual people I've met.....and plan on seeing again in a month....hopefully).
Sifting through this LONG thread has provided a bit (tiny bit) of clarity that makes me want to ask more questions.
I still don't know what Pete is doing (but I still have to read his blog). Obviously, I'm interested.....i like living.
Soooo, I appreciated people sharing. THIS IS IMPORTANT. Some people dedicate a good amount of time to researching, and are simply better at it. It is not a big deal for me to admit that I am not one of those, but I am open-minded.
Everyone handles things differently. Thanks Tedd for starting this thread. And thanks to everyone for their time.0 -
come and learn germanjanie1 said:Tans said:" Already there
Tans said:
" Already there is significant known overlap between cancers based on molecular pathways, biomarkers and targeted treatments in common".
Manwithnoname states the different drugs his son is on ( I won't re-name them all again). But I was (am) interested in the different classifications.
Connecting the dots??? It's hard. But, this sort of makes me wonder about a clinical trial that I know a number of people are in. They stay at the place I stay at when I get treatment. It is a Phase 1, and people with different types of cancer are in the same trial. I'm sure it is individualized, but it shows that those doctors are treating different cancers based on the above - "because there is an overlap between cancers......"
I have been trying to get information from them (people in the trial). Since it is very early in the trial, there is obviously not a whole lot to go on. Everything has a start.
The trial is FDA-approved, not affiliated with one of the "big" places ( very possibly a good thing).
I won't get long-winded on this. But the little info I have heard has made me consider this as perhaps something I need to pursue......time is running out. The trial has a waiting list, so I may never know......
The only reason I came back to this topic, is from what Tans said, and then what Tony said his son was taking, and, the little that I know from that clinical trial ( and actual people I've met.....and plan on seeing again in a month....hopefully).
Sifting through this LONG thread has provided a bit (tiny bit) of clarity that makes me want to ask more questions.
I still don't know what Pete is doing (but I still have to read his blog). Obviously, I'm interested.....i like living.
Soooo, I appreciated people sharing. THIS IS IMPORTANT. Some people dedicate a good amount of time to researching, and are simply better at it. It is not a big deal for me to admit that I am not one of those, but I am open-minded.
Everyone handles things differently. Thanks Tedd for starting this thread. And thanks to everyone for their time.
if your short of cash, rob a bank and do the time when you come home cured.
only joking of course. don't do the time plead insanity, its worked for me for years.
goodluck finding an answer janie, don't stop dreaming and hoping.
hugs,
pete0 -
"totally separate"Lovekitties said:Tanstallfl
More info please, because I am a bit confused about this separate or not totally separate issue.
If the word "totally" is the key then I guess I agree since from what I have read cancers are caused by cells gone bad during division or failure to die in a normal fashion.
If they weren't separate wouldn't all be able to be treated with one chemo and all those treated have the same results from treatment? If they weren't separate why would there be a need to test tumors to find the chemo which would provide the best response?
I understand that some folks ( Pete and MWNN to name two ) do use some chemo's in an "off label" manner, but I have not read anywhere where chemo treatments are interchangable in the norm.
The only targeted treatment which comes to mind which crosses several different cancers is radiation. Can you give us some others?
If it were true that a cure for one cancer would cure all, that would be wonderful indeed.
Marie who loves kitties
Lovekitties, "target" in my discussion is about targeted molecular pathways of aberrant cells, where ever they occur, not tightly focused anatomical locations.
Totally independent cancers would have separate biomarkers and pathways, say Cancer1 had biomarkers A, B, C, D versus Cancer2 only had biomarkers, E and F. In reality, even with different organs, two "different" cancers might have A and B in common, separated only by D in Cancer1 and nothing more in Cancer2. Lots of overlap rather just using Drug1 only for Cancer1 and Drug2 only for Cancer2.
If you have a healthy Substance1 that neutralizes or ameliorates the pathway with Biomarker A, and a cheap tolerable Substance2 that neutralizes or ameliorates the pathway with Biomarker B, you might add both Substance1 and Substance2 to both cancers' treatments if there is no adverse interaction combining them with other treatments too.
Immunotherapies target certain molecular pathways and cellular processes to promote immune functions.
Some off label drugs and nutrient uses are already known to manipulate described molecular pathways in biologically based alternative medicine.0
Discussion Boards
- All Discussion Boards
- 6 CSN Information
- 6 Welcome to CSN
- 121.8K Cancer specific
- 2.8K Anal Cancer
- 446 Bladder Cancer
- 309 Bone Cancers
- 1.6K Brain Cancer
- 28.5K Breast Cancer
- 397 Childhood Cancers
- 27.9K Colorectal Cancer
- 4.6K Esophageal Cancer
- 1.2K Gynecological Cancers (other than ovarian and uterine)
- 13K Head and Neck Cancer
- 6.4K Kidney Cancer
- 671 Leukemia
- 792 Liver Cancer
- 4.1K Lung Cancer
- 5.1K Lymphoma (Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin)
- 237 Multiple Myeloma
- 7.1K Ovarian Cancer
- 61 Pancreatic Cancer
- 487 Peritoneal Cancer
- 5.5K Prostate Cancer
- 1.2K Rare and Other Cancers
- 539 Sarcoma
- 730 Skin Cancer
- 653 Stomach Cancer
- 191 Testicular Cancer
- 1.5K Thyroid Cancer
- 5.8K Uterine/Endometrial Cancer
- 6.3K Lifestyle Discussion Boards