MD, PhD, FMedSci, FRSB, FRCP, FRCPEd.

Tomorrow is WORLD CANCER DAY. To mark this important occasion, I intend to publish not just one but two posts. Today’s post discloses one of the more sickening alternative cancer scams I have seen for a long time (tomorrow’s post will be a lot more encouraging): baking soda as a cancer cure. Here is what some charlatans tell the most vulnerable of our patients.

START OF QUOTE

Even the most aggressive cancers which have metastasized have been reversed with baking soda cancer treatments… Doctors and pharmaceutical companies make money from it. That’s the only reason chemotherapy is still used. Not because it’s effective, decreases morbidity, mortality or diminishes any specific cancer rates. In fact, it does the opposite. Chemotherapy boosts cancer growth and long-term mortality rates and oncologists know it…

Studies have shown that dietary measures to boost bicarbonate levels can increase the pH of acidic tumors without upsetting the pH of the blood and healthy tissues. Animal models of human breast cancer show that oral sodium bicarbonate does indeed make tumors more alkaline and inhibit metastasis. Based on these studies, plus the fact that baking soda is safe and well tolerated, world renowned doctors such as Dr. Julian Whitaker have adopted successful cancer treatment protocols as part of an overall nutritional and immune support program for patients who are dealing with the disease…

When taken orally with water, especially water with high magnesium content, and when used transdermally in medicinal baths, sodium bicarbonate becomes a first-line medicinal for the treatment of cancer, and also kidney disease, diabetes, influenza and even the common cold. It is also a powerful buffer against radiation exposure, so everyone should be up to speed on its use. Everybody’s physiology is under heavy nuclear attack from strong radioactive winds that are circling the northern hemisphere…

The pH of our tissues and body fluids is crucial and central because it affects and mirrors the state of our health or our inner cleanliness. The closer the pH is to 7.35-7.45, the higher our level of health and wellbeing. Staying within this range dramatically increases our ability to resist acute illnesses like colds and flues as well as the onset of cancer and other diseases. Keeping our pH within a healthy range also involves necessary lifestyle and dietary changes that will protect us over the long term while the use of sodium bicarbonate gives us a jump-start toward increased alkalinity…

Basically, malignant tumors represent masses of rapidly growing cells. The rapid rate of growth experienced by these cells means that cellular metabolism also proceeds at very high rates. Therefore, cancer cells are using a lot more carbohydrates and sugars to generate energy in the form of ATP (adenosine triphosphate). However, some of the compounds formed from the energy production include lactic acid and pyruvic acid. Under normal circumstances, these compounds are cleared and utilized as soon as they are produced. But cancer cells are experiencing metabolism at a much faster rate. Therefore, these organic acid accumulate in the immediate environment of the tumor. The high level of extracellular acidity around the tumor is one of the chief driving force behind the metastasis of cancer tumors. Basically, cancer cells need an acidic environment to grow and spread rapidly…

One does not have to be a doctor to practice pH medicine. Every practitioner of the healing arts and every mother and father needs to understand how to use sodium bicarbonate. Bicarbonate deficiency is a real problem that deepens with age so it really does pay to understand and appreciate what baking soda is all about.

END OF QUOTE

I am sure you agree: this is not just unethical and irresponsible; it is vile!

There are far too many falsehoods in this text (and most of them are too obvious) for me to even begin to correct them.

Why do I post this just before WORLD CANCER DAY?

Because I believe that cancer patients need to be protected from people and institutions who tout dangerous nonsense. Sadly, in the realm of alternative medicine, there are many of such charlatans.

146 Responses to This must be the most sickening cancer scam I have seen for a while

  • “The closer the pH is to 7.35-7.45, the higher our level of health and wellbeing”

    This is unarguably true – and if it strays outside those limits you will have acidosis or alkalosis and be very sick.

    Fortunately, evolution has equipped us with a sophisticated biofeedback system which regulates bodily pH within precisely those limits. Which is why we don’t die when we eat an orange.

  • I could not find any contact details for this site, other than the domain registrant who appears to be in Vietnam. The ad links to energiseforlife.com which is a British site, so subject to UK consumer law. There is a long list of references which I will try to get checked, as I suspect they don’t support the claims at all. Does anyone want to help me with this?

  • ….and the first thing I find is that Dr Joe Pizzorno, corresponding author on the first paper cited, is a naturopath and affiliated with the Institute of Functional Medicine, and a founder of the quack Bastyr University. This is the paper which the site claims is `research’ from the `prestigious Cambridge University’ It isn’t, it’s a review paper published in the British Journal of Nutrition, which is published by Cambridge University Press. Goodness, this is going to be fun.

  • Definition of a SCAM:

    “An illegal plan for making money, especially one that involves tricking people”

    You are again making a serious allegation without supporting evidence!

    • SCAM = A fraudulent business scheme; a swindle.
      http://www.thefreedictionary.com/scam

    • I RECOMMEND SULFUR 30C
      but watch it: you might have an aggravation!

    • Instead of ‘scam’, he could have just called it ‘a pack of lies’ – would you be OK with that, Colin?

      • If it is, then it is hard to disagree but where is the evidence of lies or fraud?

        • anyone with a functioning brain can see or find the evidence that baking powder does not cure cancer… except you, it seems

          • Your an idiot but your right Baking powder does not work on cancer!!!

            Baking Soda is completely different than baking powder, obviously you have never laid foot in a kitchen either.
            So it is fear that is what this scam of yours is all about to distract people from trying something that does not line your pocket with more money. That is what the article is talking about. The only reason you are calling it a scam is this could end the ability for you, if your really all you say you? DR!? is your ability to continue collecting that $3+ millions of Dollars for every cancer patient you treat with radiation.

            And Les Rose, about the man you said was on trial for killing someone who knowingly went to him, hoping to be cured by something that gave him more hope than the chemo and radiation treatment that was a definite toe tag ticket to the other side. They got that trial all wrong. They fact that these Oncologist have the money to pay off whomever they need to in order to continue keeling people with the hope of beating cancer by killing the cells that one needs in order to have an immune system capable of fighting off even the comon cold. You certainly are brain washed by the government that has superficially implanted an image of what radiation and chemo really does to the body. Why don’t they show you what it does by sticking an Atom Bomb up ones a–. We all know what happened to Hiroshima, after the Atom bomb was dropped. To get rid of a small group of bad people millions died and the radiation affected the masses. So why? and how? could the use of directly injecting radiation into the bad cells of the body kill a small mass of bad cells give one person hope that it can be contained to just the bad cells… WELL YOU CAN’T.. And any person that claims to be a Dr. and continues to convince their cancer patients to try chemo and radiation and then loose the client in the end. Should be put on trial for what they put Simoncini on trial for. As well as any instructor or pharmaceutical company that claims that their chemo and radiation treatment is going to prolong your life as they know they are just extending your life long enought to collect Millions of dollars from the insurance companies who continue to pay out for these hanus crimes.

            You need to really check the research that may be needing some research by someone who is as prestigious as you think you are. And please try the baking soda in your test!!! not baking powder

          • “We all know what happened to Hiroshima, after the Atom bomb was dropped. To get rid of a small group of bad people millions died”
            I don’t think there is anything in your post that is based on fact, other than that baking powder is sometimes a mixture of sodium bicarbonate and tartaric acid. A lot of people died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, either outright or from the effects of radiation exposure, and a few hundred also developed radiation induced tumours, but it was not millions.

          • yours truly said:

            Your an idiot

            Well…

          • well, then it must be true, mustn’t it?

    • “[Colin] You are again making a serious allegation without supporting evidence!”

      A scam is generally considered to be the promotion of a product or a service that itself lacks adequately supporting evidence. Therefore, requesting evidence of its lack of evidence is both: a pathetic attempt to shift the burden of proof; a pathetic attempt to despise anyone and everyone who dares to either critique it, or dares to request from the vendor adequately supporting evidence!

      I suggest that you properly study what constitutes medical fraud.

      • Criminals claim they do not commit burglaries, murder or fraud because they are sociopaths and narcissists. The recently popular and fraudulent “alkaline diet” must have “metastasized” from this “baking soda treatment.”

      • Is there a video about it? Videos are the only medium our Colin regards as evidence.

    • If the site is based in Vietnam, it is likely garbage copied from who knows where and being used as click bait. The ads are automatic, but the ad provider pays a fraction of a cent to the site owner for every click through. All they care about is generating traffic.

      • Alas, the baking soda cancer crazyness is all to real. If you wish to know where “God knows where is, then look up a madman named Tullio Simoncini, (http://www.curenaturalicancro(dot)com/en/) or have a look at the deranged woman exposed by Britt-Marie Hermeshere

        • Dear Bjorn : madman as you described has saved my life and also the life of Ronald Holmes from Tenessee USA . Ron riddled with bladder cancer for the last three years was in his 41 st day of his Simoncini treatment in Rome which is where i met Ron and his wife Kelly. After three operations and urinating blood fir three years the last operation of one and half hour duration in USA the doctors gave up and basically told him that in order to survive he would need to have his bladder and prostate cut out and do chemo and radiation if he wanted to live . He came to Rome where he was treated by Tullio Simoncini after two weeks his urine was clear it’s three months now and he is still cancer free and happily sailing his boat in Florida I got an email from him yesterday. A young German Canadian also was cured whilst I was there getting treatment he is 43 years of age a bladder cancer victim and of course they the oncologists in Canada told him his insides would need to be cut out if he wanted to survive! How many innocent people are killed each day with chemotherapy radiation hormone therapy all of which have horrendous effects I should know I’m a stage three prostate cancer patient!
          Also have lymphoma and osephegas cancer Perhaps most people go to Tullio when they’ve exhausted the cut burn poison therapy of so called modern medicine and as a last resort go to Simoncini when it’s too late
          I’ve had a CT PSMA pet scan done after the Simoncini treatment and I have no activity of cancer at the moment.
          Clearly the professionals can’t be convicted because they follow a standard accepted protocol, do you know the percentage of people who die after chemo !
          Open your mind and educate yourself ! My cousin who is a Kidney Specialist in Verona was concerned that I would be a Victim of Simoncini but the two lots of blood tests mid way and at the end of my treatment proved beyond doubt that my liver kidney pancreas red blood cells etc etc was better than when I started the treatment and I have had no side effects! I come from Melbourne Australia fortunately my relatives are in the medical field in Italy and I was able to be monitored. Ps I’ve had no side effects other than feeling thirsty about week 4 of treatment. my email is lou.s.silluzio@ gmail. com if anyone wishes to know more I have video evidence taken by myself of the success of the Sodium Bicarbonate treatment by Dr Tullio Simoncini
          I know he can’t cure everything and everyone but the people I met had 100 % success with his protocol and have been spared surgery chemotherapy and radiation and all of the discusting side effects!

          • Lou, I have “opened my mind” and “done my research”. This is what I found:

            “Simoncini was tried and found guilty of fraud and manslaughter in 2006 after a patient died receiving his treatment.”

            In 2018, Simoncini received a 5-year jail sentence for culpable manslaughter of a cancer patient in 2011.”

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tullio_Simoncini

            This man kills people. You need to understand that the plural of anecdote is not evidence. Please direct me to rigorous controlled trials published by Simoncini in quality journals.

          • Lou Silluzio said:

            I know he can’t cure everything and everyone

            How do you know that?

          • “Ron riddled with bladder cancer for the last three years was in his 41 st day of his Simoncini treatment in Rome which is where i met Ron and his wife Kelly. After three operations and urinating blood fir three years the last operation of one and half hour duration in USA the doctors gave up and basically told him that in order to survive he would need to have his bladder and prostate cut out and do chemo and radiation if he wanted to live . He came to Rome where he was treated by Tullio Simoncini after two weeks his urine was clear it’s three months now and he is still cancer free”

            You clearly don’t know very much about the natural history of bladder cancer. It usually starts as small warty growths on the surface of the bladder which can be easily removed and although they tend to recur, it often never progresses beyond that stage. However, once it starts to invade the bladder wall then it is only a matter of time before it spreads further and becomes incurable. However, conventional treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (either surgical removal of the bladder, or radiotherapy together with a chemosensitiser, not both) are very successful treatments, and the cure rate can be further improved by combining this with a course of chemotherapy.

            It is not unusual for bleeding from a bladder tumour to stop for a while, and your friend’s history is entirely in keeping with the expected progression from early, superficial tumours, to muscle-invasive but still curable disease.

            “madman as you described has saved my life”
            I doubt it. If you have stage III prostate cancer, depending on the TNM stage there is still a possibility of cure with conventional treatment, and in any case it can certainly keep you well and prolong your life.

            “I’ve had a CT PSMA pet scan done after the Simoncini treatment and I have no activity of cancer at the moment”
            What did it look like before the treatment? What was the interval between the scans? Have you had any other treatment at all?

            “Also have lymphoma and osephegas cancer”
            If that is the case why are you worrying about prostate cancer?

            “How many innocent people are killed each day”
            Innocent of what? Are you saying that it is OK to kill the guilty?

            “with chemotherapy radiation hormone therapy all of which have horrendous effects I should know I’m a stage three prostate cancer patient!”
            Are you saying that you have had chemotherapy, radiation and hormone therapy? Chemotherapy certainly isn’t standard treatment for stage III prostate cancer, though hormone therapy to reduce your testosterone level certainly is. Modern radiotherapy to the prostate and pelvic nodes isn’t horrendous at all for most people. Have you tried talking to anybody who has had it? In any case, it is very rare that anybody is killed by hormone treatment or radiotherapy; chemotherapy is more dangerous, but this has to be balanced against the greater number of lives saved.

          • Thank you for taking the time to provide this very useful information. It is greatly appreciated! I am amazed at the lack of capability in the medical research as I investigate these issues. All research which I have conducted leads me to believe Otto Warburg’s investigations were the last serious science until Tullio Simoncini’s. Thes negative responses you address have actually caused several of my relatives to ignore Dr. Simoncini’s treatment and undergo the chemo and radiation which ultimately took their lives in a cruel, painful manner.

            Thank you for stepping up!

          • “Otto Warburg’s investigations were the last serious science until Tullio Simoncini’s”
            You do a disservice to Warburg by this comparison. Though to suggest that physiology research conducted a century ago was the last serious science is a bit dismissive of what has been discovered since then.

            “Thes negative responses you address have actually caused several of my relatives to ignore Dr. Simoncini’s treatmen”
            I’m not clear what you are referring to. Do you mean negative responses of cancer to bicarbonate? In which case your relatives seem to have been acting rationally.

            “chemo and radiation which ultimately took their lives in a cruel, painful manner”
            Are you sure of this? It is rather unusual for anybody to die from the effects of radiotherapy. Chemotherapy-related deaths are more commmon, though still only represent a small fraction of patients treated (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2045(16)30383-7/fulltext). However, most deaths following palliative cancer treatment are from the cancer itself.

    • Delusional bullshit can still be a scam. The term is informal.

      I notice you “forgot” to condemn this transparent quackery. No doubt you’ll be correcting that.

  • I’ve realised that the energiseforlife.com ad is an automatic one, but I’m grateful to the mighty Google for pointing me to what is undoubtedly a scam. So far none of the references supports any of the claims. It is clearly illegal, at least in the UK, to make health claims without evidence, and especially to solicit payment.

  • Gee, isn’t Tulio Simoncini in prison for killing people exactly this same way? He would inject baking soda (BS!) directly into breast tumours. All his patients died, of course, and he was stripped of his medical license and thrown in jail in Italy.

    Let’s not forget Robert O. Young, who got rich selling his entire pH quackery to vulnerable, desperate and misguided patients. He’s also in jail, for pretending to be a doctor.

    Funny that uber-quack Julian Whitaker is cited. He’s an anti-vax, anti-psychiatry “detox” advocate and loon. Unfortunately he’s a real MD, which brings a certain implied (and undeserved) credibility.

    For a few years Whitaker served on the board of a scientology front group called the Citizen’s Coalition for Human Rights (CCHR), a militant anti-psychiatry organization. Their motto is “Psychiatry: an industry of death.” I didn’t know he had bought into the whole baking soda scam.

    Whitaker has also tangled with Orac and there’s a very amusing video of this crackpot showing graphs that make no sense.

    • Oh, and stupid me, I forgot the best part! Whitaker is also one of the few doctors on the planet willing to speak on behalf of Stan Burzynski. That alone tells you all you need to know about his level of credulity.

      He sells a ton of supplements, anti-aging potions and other garbage on his website too, like all good quacks.

      • Are you talking of Burzynsky who has been acquitted again quite recently, and who has a spectacular cure record, and hundreds of cured patients testifying and gathering at the court? I bet you also think Hillary is a virgin.

        • So this is Burzynski’s spectacular cure record?

          https://theotherburzynskipatientgroup.wordpress.com/

          30+ years, 60+ `trials’ and still no product licence? Your level of debate does you no credit.

        • Burzynski has been researching these since the 70s. He’s conducted many trials (64), but never managed to produce any credible evidence that they work for any type. Not only that but when others have tested them they can’t either https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4366171/ In my view they have been sufficiently studied and now should be regarded as a disproven treatment.

        • Burzynski has not been “acquitted”, there are findings against him despite the court being swayed in a way they really should not have been by emotional appeals. The TMB would yank his license in a heartbeat if they could. The FDA inspected several times, and found massive violations every time.

          Burzynski has no credible evidence to support his treatments. He’s been selling them for decades, latterly under the pretence of clinical trials. At no point has he produced a single publication in a credible journal that gives any reason to suppose his treatment works.

          The Houston cancer quack is probably the most unethical doctor still licensed to practice in the US.

        • George, thank you for defending healthy approaches ans those who strive towards healing our bodies and not just throwing drugs and radiation at us.

  • And speak of the devil. This was published a week ago:

    http://www.businessinsider.com/alkaline-ph-diet-founder-arrested-2017-1

    The BBC reported that Young advised a woman who was dying from breast cancer, British army officer Naima Houder-Mohammed, to pay him thousands of dollars for his alkaline treatment, which predominantly consisted of baking soda administered intravenously. According to the BBC, Houder-Mohammed and her family ended up paying Young more than $77,000 (£62,700) for the treatment and his advice.

    Houder-Mohammed stayed at Young’s facility, the “pH Miracle Ranch,” for three months, according to the BBC, until her condition worsened and she was taken to the hospital. She died at age 27.

    In 2011, the Medical Board of California began an investigation at Young’s ranch, where it discovered that none of the 15 cancer patients Young treated there outlived their prognosis. One woman died from congestive heart failure after being given 33 intravenous sodium bicarbonate drips over 31 days at a cost of $550 each, according to the BBC.

    • And how many people have survived simply by doing chemotherapies and radiotherapies? Neither of them work. I have lost six people to cancer from my close circle of family and friends. They all did chemos and radiotherapies and NONE survived!! So, selling “treatments” that do not really work, isn’t that also a scam?

      • Very good point!

      • The truth is so difficult to find regarding Cancer and other diseases. Chemo destroys the immunity system. Period. End of story. How can that be a good thing?

        • the best cancer treatment usually is the one which enables the patient to live longest with a decent quality of life; and that can be measured in months and years. so the truth is often not so difficult to determine.

      • I didn´t see any comments about what Mr. Theodore stated by those who vouch for the traditional medicine…..if those using sodium bicarbonate on cancer are thrown to jail, what about the doctors using “legal” chemicals to kill not a few but thousands since chemotherapy has been used on us?….

        Not because something is generally accepted or done by the masses is necessarily the right thing to do….or else, killing Jews would be ok nowadays…but it is not, right?….perhaps killing black people, or let us put it in a more politically correct term, Afro-descendants for those who might be tempted to let their sensitivity rise….what about killing indigenous people….back in the days it was ok doing so…they were just considered animals by those conquering the world….subjects that most people do not want to talk about….something pretty similar to what is happening with the chemotherapy usage around the world……big companies making a lot of money with those infected by the same governments who are supposed to protect them in the first place….is it right?….of course not!!!…But they all do it for the sake of money and power…and whoever steps on their way is simply thrown to jail making examples on each one who dares to gain a piece fo their cake.
        Doctors around the world (no all of them) are just a bunch of corrupted members of one of the biggest cartels in the world – The Pharmaceutical Industry – dress in white…like the second biggest cartel – The Catholic Church – dress in white and purple…both just a bunch of criminals pretending to be there to help those in need.
        This is about money and power, it is not about helping those in need….

        • you should see a good doctor about your paranoia!

          • Really Doc?……Shouldn’t we say most doctors in the world should be persecuted and hanged to death for knowingly helping spread a killing enterprise?
            If I mention to you that governments do so in regular bases, you might disagree with me..but I going to give you a simple example just to see if you agree with me on this point…..cigarettes/tobacco….it´s sold everywhere, right?
            The government taxed it and allow this multimillion-dollar enterprise to keep doing business as usual as if nothing happens, but we know that lots of people are dying from cancer induce by tobacco….but the government keeps their eyes closed and permit such companies to get away with murder…isn´t the same government who are supposed to protect it´s citizen from getting harm?
            Do you get my point Doc?
            Pharmaceutical corporations keep doing illegal shit thanks to the money they invest..the hands they grease constantly..doctors included…and because you have a ph degree or whatever piece of paper hang into a wall, being haft deaf and fully blind doesn´t make you less innocent than most prigs running this multi-million dollar business….if you keep silent you become a partner in crime..an accessory..and THAT is what you are!!!

          • “if you keep silent you become a partner in crime..an accessory..and THAT is what you are!!!”
            I much rather keep silent than utter such nonsense as you do.

  • Bicarbonate “deficiency”? My fridge had one the other day, so I opened a new box of baking soda and put it in.

    Good on you, Les Rose. It would be interesting to see who started this nonsense and why.

  • The site mentions that a certain Mark Paget at the University of Arizona received a grant of $2 million to conduct a study of baking soda in cancer patients. That study has been completed, but the results have not been posted.

    • It will be interesting to see the results of this study and if positive, what will be posted on this blog!

      • as you seem to be a bit slow on the uptake, let me explain this to you:
        even if the study turns out to be convincingly positive, the claims I exposed in this post are bogus and irresponsible, not least because they were made before clinical trials were available.
        got it?
        somehow, I doubt it!

        • Your original post would have been more acceptable if you had made reference to this study and that the outcome is still to be published. All I am suggesting is a more balanced approach on your behalf. As a professional investigator I believe that all the known facts should be presented in any report so that balanced and informed choices and decisions can be made. Call that delusional if you will!

  • It appears to me that, given the focus of Dr. Paget’s previous work, his study on oral dosing of sodium bicarbonate has more to do with imaging tumors and revealing their pH in an effort to develop more effective cancer chemotherapeutics than anything else. Given the acidic environment of the human gastrointestinal tract, it will be surprising if even that works. As near as I can tell, the idea of treating cancer patients with baking soda is based on tumor inhibition in rodents. But just because something seems to work in rodents doesn’t mean that it will be effective in humans.

  • I have one simple question: Has anyone really survived cancer simply by doing chemo and radiotherapies? Like, really beat cancer and live a long life without cancer coming back? And if the are success stories, how many do we count? Three, five, ten, 600, 10.000, 3.000.000? Let’s start talking about scam then!

    • Theodre, you are asking the wrong question. The simple answer is yes, millions of people survive cancer with chemo and radio. Many of them survive long enough to die of something else. In that case cancer never came back because the patient was dead. You really need to be looking at how long they survived. There is a huge amount of data on this, eg:

      http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.3322/caac.21349/full

      In contrast, patients who refuse chemo and radio, in favour of alternative medicine, die earlier:

      https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article/110/1/djx145/4064136

      It took me 5 minutes to find these studies. It really isn’t hard.

      • it appears that this link takes you to studies that are somehow related to American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute which are supported by…you guessed it…Pharmaceutical companies. The problem is most articles written that are in any way related to either Big Pharma OR someone that they support simply cannot be trusted. Period. It’s unfortunate yes. But true.

    • @Thodre

      Another answer to your question is to look at childhood cancers. Among the most common of these is acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and the usual treatment modality for ALL is chemotherapy, with radiotherapy and surgery added if necessary. For childhood ALL the 5-year survival rates are 85-90%, and according to the American Cancer Society “children who are free of the disease after 5 years are very likely to have been cured, because it’s very rare for these cancers to return after this long.” About 3,000 people below the age of 20 are newly diagnosed each year with ALL. So the number of people cured by chemo and radiotherapy in the USA alone numbers in the 10 thousands. Those are people who “really beat cancer and live a long life without cancer coming back”.
      (Sources: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/leukemia-in-children/detection-diagnosis-staging/survival-rates.html, https://www.stjude.org/disease/acute-lymphoblastic-leukemia-all.html)

      Now, children are more easily cured of any form of cancer than adults: take a look at http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/acute-lymphoblastic-leukaemia-all/survival for differential survival in ALL. But your implication that chemotherapy is ineffective and a scam is way out of line. Response rates and 5-year survival rates depend on the type of cancer (there are more than 200 different types), the patient’s age, and how early the cancer is diagnosed. Your other comment is ripe with indignation, but provides no indication of the ages, cancer types or stage of diagnosis among the six of your family and friends who succumbed to cancer despite treatment.

      Can you not see how worthless anecdotes are compared with properly obtained data, as Les Rose pointed out to you? Your blanket conclusion that chemo “doesn’t work” and is a “scam”, based on your personal experience, has the same value as comments on this blog from people who ate broccoli and their cancer went away. The plural of ‘anecdote’ is ‘anecdotes’, not ‘data’!

  • BWilliams
    It has taken you nearly a year to come up with this response! The National Cancer Institute is a government agency of the National Institutes of Health, and the American Cancer Society is a charity. Your claim is worthless unless you can provide evidence that both are in the pay of pharma companies.

    Even so, should I take more notice of a charlatan who makes money by selling baking soda for cancer?

  • Edzard Ernst is a large stock holer in big pharma. This douche waffle is nothing more than controlled opposition . YES. cancer must have a low metabolic ph to take hold and spread. And yes. ..Sodium Bicarbonate is crucial to both blood pH and metabolic pH.

    • thank you!
      [for this clear evidence of your deluded state of mind]

    • Well there we go. Adam’s ten minutes reading Natural News beats everyone else’s medical degrees.

      You might want to look up the Dunning-Kruger effect, Adam. You might develop a little self-awareness.

      But I doubt it.

  • Water only fasting rapidly cures cancers. I KNOW THIS BECAUSE I HAD LIVER AND BOWEL CANCER AND IT RAPIDLY DISAPPEARED.

    • water only fasting leads to death within a few weeks

    • Water only fasting rapidly cures cancers. I KNOW THIS BECAUSE I HAD LIVER AND BOWEL CANCER AND IT RAPIDLY DISAPPEARED.

      I see. In other words, doctors who don’t do water fasts when they have cancer are simply suicidal.

  • @yours truly:

    “They got that trial all wrong.”

    How convenient! You are also a medico-legal expert?

    “…continue collecting that $3+ millions of Dollars for every cancer patient you treat with radiation.”

    I think you need to check your facts before making accusations of conflicts of interest. That comment is defamatory.

    “You need to really check the research”.

    Translation: Trawl the internet for inflammatory conspiracy theories that support your prejudices.

    • “…continue collecting that $3+ millions of Dollars for every cancer patient you treat with radiation.”
      That would be nice. I would have been able to afford to build my own cancer centre after just a few weeks in practice.

  • I hate it when personal testimonies are refuted…. what gives with that ? I would believe a personal testimony wayyyy before I beleive the AMA FDA CDC or big Pharma

    JMO

    • … a very good advice for going straight back to the dark ages!!!

      • From what experience do you speak, have you done so ? I speak from my own expereince with the FDA and big Pharma. I wouldn’t claim that my experience nulifies science, but neither can science nulify my experience. Big Pharma almost killed me, and did it with prior knowledge that it might do so…without warning the public ! Why should I trust them ? And why shoud I doubt somebodys testimony that has nothing to gain ?

        Cannabis was a staple medication the late 19th century & early 20th century, when big Pharma came along around the year 1930, they quickly outlawed the cannibas and hemp plants. Without the cannabis med as a legal substance, generations soon lost the knowledge of the benefits. Now after more generations of again using cannabis, the health bennefits have been rediscovered for many. Yes, some found true relief in “going back to the dark ages”. However, the oppostion from Gov. agencies and big Pharma continues…. hmmm

        • “Big Pharma almost killed me, and did it with prior knowledge that it might do so”
          How? Did you experience a rare but recognised toxicity, or are you saying that they falsified or suppressed trial results?

          “And why shoud I doubt somebodys testimony that has nothing to gain ? ”
          Because such testimonies are nevertheless generally very unreliable.

          “Cannabis was a staple medication the late 19th century & early 20th century”
          It has been a staple of Chinese traditional medicine for much longer than that (and as an aside, its name in Mandarin – ma (2nd tone) – is an interesting example of how tone changes the meaning of words in that language: ma (1st tone) is mother, ma (3rd tone) is horse, ma (4th tone) means to scold and ma (no tone) at the end of a sentence turns it into a question). In Western medicine I don’t think it had that much of a foothold. During the period you are talking about, there weren’t very many effective drugs of any kind, and it was the advent of better alternatives, as well as the problems associated with its use, that led to its demise.

          “when big Pharma came along around the year 1930, they quickly outlawed the cannibas and hemp plants.”
          I think you will find that the Government were the ones to outlaw cannabis. Do you think Big Pharma was also responsible for Prohibition in the USA at the same time/

          “generations soon lost the knowledge of the benefits”
          Are you saying that cannabis use in the last 90 years has been so rare that nobody knows its effects any more?

          “Now after more generations of again using cannabis”
          How many generations do you reckon there have been since 1930? A generation is normally regarded as 25 years.

          ” the oppostion from Gov. agencies and big Pharma continues”
          Pharmaceutical companies are actively researching into cannabis as a source of useful drugs, though this is hampered by laws restricting its supply and use, which in any case have not been very effective in addressing the social problems associated with recreational drugs.

          • Gee doc, thanks for correcting me on every count, I was’nt aware I could be so wrong. I can quickly see that you know more than anybody here. I see though your BS

          • “I was’nt aware I could be so wrong.”

            And yet you make it look so effortless.

          • … hallmark of the true homeopath

          • BTW – The drug was Vioxx, the perpetrator was Merck. Yes, they knew and didn’t disclose it to the public.

          • “BTW – The drug was Vioxx, the perpetrator was Merck. Yes, they knew and didn’t disclose it to the public.”

            Did you have a heart attack while taking Vioxx? Did you have a preexisting heart condition?

          • Vioxx, which was taken off the market, along with other COX2 inhibitors (except for celecoxib) when it was found that people taking it had a higher risk of coronary heart disease. It does, of course, have many of the other toxicities associated with NSAIDs, such as renal failure and fluid retention. Was that your problem, or something else?

          • What are you ? … and idiot, or a shill for big Pharma.

            This isn’t about pot or Coca-Cola
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1779871/

            …nuff said

          • yes, everyone who objects to woo is a pharma shill; makes sense.

          • This isn’t about pot

            That is correct. So you did learn something after all. Well done. I am proud of you. How did you find it out?

          • yes, everyone who objects to woo is a pharma shill; makes sense.

            I think he is heeding ancient wisdom, and we all know how irrefutable that is.
            He that is not with me is against me (Jesus, in the infallible Bible)

        • Cannabis was a staple medication the late 19th century & early 20th century

          So was Coca-Cola.

  • It appears that we have another tame idiot unhappy that their anecdotes can be deconstructed and demolished by experts.

    Welcome to the bearpit, RG. You might want to Google “Dunning Kruger” before contributing further.

  • It wouldn’t be surprising if the ‘experts’ on here who are so sure that they are experts are in fact suffering from the Dunning Kruger effect.

    • The doc didn’t respond to this, he preferrs to change the subject or ridicule, I’m still waiting.

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1779871/

      • The doc didn’t respond to this, he preferrs to change the subject

        Emphasis mine.

        Did you have a heart attack while taking Vioxx? Did you have a preexisting heart condition?

        #PatientlyWaiting

      • The doc didn’t respond to this, he preferrs to change the subject or ridicule, I’m still waiting

        Perhaps. The subject is “This must be the most sickening cancer scam I have seen for a while”. How does Vioxx fit into this?

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1779871/

        Even the authors of this article, who have an interest in representing Merck as badly as they can, are mentioning that “few academic researchers publicly questioned the company before its voluntary withdrawal of the drug”. What part of the meaning of the word “voluntary” escapes you? Or are you simply objecting to the fact that Merck withdrew it?

      • Which doc? Are you referring to me, only I can’t find any question that you have addressed to me directly?

        The BMJ article you link to makes very interesting reading. Clearly Merck behaved very badly by failing to follow up a suspicion that cyclo-oxygenase inhibition may increase the risk of endothelial thrombosis, and indeed designed their trials to play down such cardiac events as could result from that. Unfortunately this is what happens when a pharmaceutical company, whose primary legal responsibility is to their shareholders rather than their customers, is not subject to adequate government regulation.

        I am assuming that you must have suffered a cardiovascular event (i.e. a myocardial infarction) while taking (or after taking) Vioxx. On the basis of the article you are referencing, however, it is not possible to conclude that Vioxx nearly killed you. The data clearly show a substantially increased risk of cardiovascular events resulting from the drug, but not a doubling, so it is more likely than not that your illness was not caused by the Vioxx. Also, the data did not show an increase in mortality in subjects taking Vioxx (there were more deaths, but still within the range that would be expected by chance). That is not to say that Vioxx does not increase the risk of death, simply that the trials did not demonstrate such a risk. Since there weren’t very many deaths at all, the numbers were insufficient to know.

        I am not defending Merck, and clearly the decision to withdraw Vioxx was correct. But it is not possible in an individual case to attribute an adverse event to a specific cause, unless the event is something highly unusual, such as phocomelia and thalidomide. Certainly not when the event is something common such as cardiovascular disease. Curiously, the Courts don’t always see things that way, but legal proof and scientific proof are very different.

        • “The data clearly show a substantially increased risk of cardiovascular events resulting from the drug, but not a doubling.”

          Just to put numbers behind this comment… From the Bresalier et al. study (NEJM 2005; 352:1092-1102), which led to the withdrawal of Vioxx from the market, there were 1287 patients in the Vioxx group, of whom 46 had confirmed thrombotic events and 1299 patients in the placebo-treated group, of whom 26 had confirmed thrombotic events. That’s 3.6% and 2.0%, respectively, so Vioxx was associated with an 80% increase in relative risk of myocardial infarction or ischaemic stroke..

          Merck’s corporate behaviour in connection with Vioxx was inexcusable: the drug should not have been marketed in the first place. But it’s always worth knowing the absolute risks (3.6% vs. 2.0%) to get a proper perspective.

    • Personally I thought Lenny’s comment needlessly a bit rude. (High ground, mate.)

      Speaking for myself, I am happy to declare that I am anything but an expert. I know my limitations. OTOH, I do at least have first-hand familiarity with both critical and delusional thinking (and reasonably confident of the difference between the two), alongside a layman’s understanding of scientific principles and the basic capacity for logical thought.

      Nice tu-quoque, by the way.

    • It wouldn’t be surprising if the ‘experts’ on here who are so sure that they are experts are in fact suffering from the Dunning Kruger effect.

      Please enlighten me. Who on here has declared herself/himself/itself an expert?

      • More than a couple people sounding off here, I like that. In fact, I responded more than once to the wrong person…. apologize for my harsness and ineptness. Apoligize also to take the subject off coarse to Merck/Vioxx, my point was that I don’t trust Pharma anymore, and I think it’s justitfied in light of my expereince. Merck was at fault and they new it, they killed alot of peopel and they paid a price, not a big enough price in my opinion. Some estimate as many at 60K people or more died, actually some estimates much higher. In spite of personal testimony being poo pooed here, I’ll tell a little. Yes I experienced heart attack, and quite severe. I survived only by what I consider divine intervention, I’ll say no more about that. Long before it became public that people were dying from Vioxx, and fortunalely for me, I switched my perscription back to the Celebrex (anaother COX-2 inhibitor) which I had previously being taking before the Vioxx. I did recover once off the med, my case was never reported to Merck, as I believe many were not, and in fact many related deaths (and heart attacks) were not reported, or tied to Merck/Vioxx. On the Cancer front, my mother is my main reference, she died after an eleven year battle with Multiple Myeloma (a bone cancer). From closely monitoring her experience, my current outlook regarding Oncology is largly that… it’s a business. I have been an investor in Pharma for more than 25 years, and followed the stories/news, test trials, science, patents, failures, drug apporval process and lawsuits throughout. I’m currently invested in Amgen, Bristol Myers, Regeneron, Neckter Therapudics, AbbVie and Gilead Science, I’ve owned hundered over the years. I know enough to know they are powerful corporatons, corporations with a huge lobby in DC.
        Most Meds efficacy rates are marginally better than that of the placebo, that doesn’t impress me. There are few Meds that can cure anything. My opinion has evolived to the place where I believe most Pharma drugs can be summed up as a non-lethal dose of a toxic substance. Many times the side effect being not worth the risk of treating the symptom. My preference would be to take a placbo and forfeit the ill side effects. So my conclusion is that the Pharma industry has created CUSTOMERS…. not cures.
        Many of the chronic diseases modern man is experenecing today are diet related, and curable by altering diet. It’s the food that is killing us. Food, envrionmental toxins, pills… and stress.

        Just another opinion.

        • @RG

          Just curious…if you consider divine intervention allowed you to survive your heart attack, how come the divine power didn’t intervene to influence the people developing Vioxx at Merck to do the right thing and not take the drug to market? That would have been far more efficient and saved (according to you) as many as 60k lives. I guess your life is just more special to the divine power than the other 59,999.

          • Frank
            That reply, and the queston you pose is just plain nonsense. If you don’t believe in devine intervention, just say so. After all, if there is a good and soverign God, we can just question why we have sickness and disease at all. I can see that there is no room here for personal testimony of mine. Even though I see that Dr. Julian brought in his testimony in as a doctor. And Les Rose his testimony as surviving MM. Why nobody here questions Les Rose personal testimony ? On the contrary, Edzard supports his personal testimony. However, if you’re not part of the club here on the MB, leave your personal testimony at the door.

          • RG:
            You misunderstand. Nobody is saying that what you claim happened didn’t happen. We are saying that anecdotes are not reliable evidence. You never answered my related question. If anecdotes are reliable, do you think we should abandon clinical trials and license medicines on the basis of anecdotes?

          • @RG

            “if there is a good and soverign God, we can just question why we have sickness and disease at all.”

            Correct. That’s known as theodicy, a branch of theology in which people use weasel words to dissemble their way round the embarassing problem of why a loving and all-powerful god permits so many evil things to happen.

            “I can see that there is no room here for personal testimony of mine. Even though I see that Dr. Julian brought in his testimony in as a doctor. And Les Rose his testimony as surviving MM. Why nobody here questions Les Rose personal testimony ? On the contrary, Edzard supports his personal testimony. However, if you’re not part of the club here on the MB, leave your personal testimony at the door.”

            That’s a very sad comment. It means you can’t distinguish subjective testimony from informed, rational debate.

        • “My opinion has evolived to the place where I believe most Pharma drugs can be summed up as a non-lethal dose of a toxic substance.”
          That is one of the first things that I was taught in my undergraduate pharmacology course.

          “On the Cancer front, my mother is my main reference, she died after an eleven year battle with Multiple Myeloma (a bone cancer). From closely monitoring her experience, my current outlook regarding Oncology is largly that… it’s a business.”
          It is unsafe to draw conclusions from a trial wher N=1. As a counter-example, my survival (so far) from myeloma is entirely due to the drugs I am on.

          “Most Meds efficacy rates are marginally better than that of the placebo”
          What do you mean by that?

          “There are few Meds that can cure anything.”
          From my experience as an oncologist: Testicular cancer, high-grade lymphoma, acute leukaemia are all curable by drugs alone. And what about such killers as meningococcal meningitis?

          “Many of the chronic diseases modern man is experenecing today are diet related”
          I don’t think that is in dispute, though since diet has a lifelong influence it is difficult to dissect out which components are important.

          “and curable by altering diet”
          That is a different matter entirely, and plainly not true in the case of malignant disease.

          • ….and my 10 year survival with myeloma is the result of treatment with…..nothing at all. What if I had spent my savings on homeopathy, fad diets, or Gerson therapy? The quacks would claim me as a success.

          • I hope the no-treatment continues to do the trick for at lease another 10 years

          • Luckily, Les, your myeloma is following a more typical course than mine is (progression through first and second-line targeted therapies and through chemotherapy given as third line, stabilisation for the past 18 months with immunotherapy as fourth line, thought unlikely to benefit from high-dose chemo and stem cells).

            I hope you are able to remain off treatment for a good while longer, but if you do require it, despite my own experience, the response to treatment is usually excellent.

            Meanwhile why not spend your savings on holidays, spending quality time with relatives and catching up on all the things you always meant to do?

            As it happens, I encountered this blog when googling some of the well-meaning but misguided advice given by various friends and acquaintances after I received by diagnosis.

          • Les Rose
            You make my case

            Why no Chemo for you ?

          • RG:
            How do I make your case? What case do you mean? No chemo for me because I have smouldering myeloma and paraprotein levels are rock steady. Had I not known better, I might have been terrified into throwing money at quacks in the hope of preventing the myeloma from progressing. Then when it didn’t they would have claimed success.

            Yes Julian I am doing exactly that – off to S America next month.

          • <<>>

            The Chemo works alright, it works at keeping you a customer. Try going off of it. Meanwhile, the Chemo is causing a myriad of other problems.

            <<>>

            Just what the word says:
            mar·gin·al·ly
            /ˈmärjənəlē/Submit
            adverb
            to only a limited extent; slightly.
            “inflation is predicted to drop marginally”

            <<>>

            I disagree, there is not a pill or drug alone that cures those problems.

            <<>>

            You are wrong on that, thousands of people have been cures of cancer by diet.

          • RG:
            “You are wrong on that, thousands of people have been cures (sic) of cancer by diet.” How about some evidence for that? No, testimonials will not do, only properly peer-reviewed published clinical trials.

          • The Chemo works alright, it works at keeping you a customer. Try going off of it. Meanwhile, the Chemo is causing a myriad of other problems.

            Then don’t take them. You will live less long and die in agony in the happy knowledge that the chemo did not cause you any problems. It’s ideal if you’re suicidal and a masochist.

          • DG

            I’m sorry. Are you saying (for
            Instance) that testicular cancer can’t be cured by chemotherapy? Or
            Meningococcal meningitis by benzylpenicillin?

  • Or why did the divine power (DP) give him the heart attack in the first place? A lot of time, effort and inconvenience could have been saved if the DP intended to intervene anyway. Why bother?

  • Hey…. you guys with your cancer, I wish the best to ya, I really do. I don’t wish ill health on anyone, but much of if is a result of lifetime choices. A life free of pill popping, steering away from contaminated food and environmental toxins has keep me in perfect health @ 65 years old. I don’t have heart disease, diabetes, cancer or any other chronic diseases some folks here have. I know what has worked for me. Keep taking your pills, eat your shit food, keep your faith in Pharma and keep on exposing yourselves to toxins…. enjoy your life on Chemo and Meds.

    • pity that you are so slow in the uptake!
      lifestyle may reduce the risk of certain cancers; however, lifestyle changes will not cure a cancer once it has occurred.
      not so difficult, is it?

      • <<>>
        ??? Slow ? …. why because you say so ? I’m in no hurry to accept the BS on this MB

        <<>>
        Lifestyle changes may not cure cancer for everyone, but neither does the AMA approved methods…. not even close.

        • as I said: slow; very slow even.

        • One thing is certain. “RG” knows less than nothing about cancer and cancer management!

        • Slight but significant difference between doesn’t cure everyone (real medicine) and doesn’t cure anyone (every quack nostrum), you know.

          Speaking for me and mine, modern mainstream oncology has won 2 out of 2 battles, irrelevant of healthy vs unhealthy living. Part of that is down to plain luck: both common cancers, detected early, with effective treatments and very good prognosis when treated in time. Living in a first-world society with excellent public and private healthcare also greatly helped. While professional oncologists do not like to say “cured”, 15+ years of remission following end of treatment and still clear sounds pretty damn cured to layfolks like me.

          OTOH, one friend of the family was not so lucky, developing an aggressive brain tumor with no warning symptoms. Time from first symptoms, through diagnosis and palliative care, to the end: just a few weeks. Still in the 50s; barely time to put affairs in order and say goodbyes. Tragic. Another family friend was diagnosed in their 70s with an incurable, but very controllable, indolent cancer. (One of those diseases of old age that many more die with than die of.) Lived well into their 80s, still active with good quality of life up to the end.

          I think your biggest problem is that your understanding of cancer is hopelessly simplistic and naive, if not outright nonsense. For starters, cancer is not one disease but a couple hundred different diseases with some common etiology but massive variations not only between different cancers but even between in the same cancer in different cases.

          I can’t recommend strongly enough that you immediately get yourself a copy of The Emperor of All Maladies by Siddhartha Mukherjee, consume it cover to cover (it really is an excellent and accessible read), and come back here when you’re done. Honest enquiry and a degree of humility will attract you a far more productive response here than the arrogance of ignorance and ideological hooey.

          Or, you know, you can just continue being idiot chew toy of the week and never grow any the wiser.

    • Interesting viewpoint, RG. Enjoy yourself on your self-constucted pillar of sanctimoniousness.

      Your position is entirely anecdotal. obviously. So I’ll pass on mine regarding two patients of mine. Lovely ladies. Lifelong vegetarians who followed ridiculously healthy lifestyles and popped fistfuls of supplements. One died of breast cancer, one of oesophageal cancer. Both diagnosed in their early 50s.

  • @RG

    Boy, you sure keep digging when you’re in a hole!

    A life free of pill popping, steering away from contaminated food and environmental toxins has keep me in perfect health @ 65 years old. I don’t have heart disease, diabetes, cancer or any other chronic diseases some folks here have.

    So you were telling us lies when you said on Tuesday “I switched my perscription back to the Celebrex (anaother COX-2 inhibitor) which I had previously being taking before the Vioxx.” Or are you telling us lies now when you claim a “life free of pill popping”? Why were you taking Celebrex if you’re so free of disease?

    And you were telling us lies when you said on Tuesday “Yes I experienced heart attack, and quite severe.” Or does a heart attack you attributed to Vioxx (which may or may not have been the cause, but you seem not to understand anything about evidence) not count? Or are you simply telling us lies now when you say “I don’t have heart disease”?

    Please give us the name of one of the ‘environmental toxins’ you’ve kept free of.

    • Oh yes, the environmental toxins I’ve eliminated or reduced

      BPA in plastics (water bottles & food storage)
      Fluoride in drinking water and toothpaste
      Formaldehyde in flue shots
      Pesticides around my home and as much as possible in my food
      Cologne
      Fabric softener in wash and dryer
      Soaps and cleaning agents that contain toxins
      Cell phone handling
      Specific clothing made from hydrocarbons

      • @RG

        How about responding to the blatant inconsistencies between your posts?

        Your list of ‘toxins’ seems to be based on scary material provided by the Environmental Working Group, an extreme US lobbying group whose data and recommendations have been widely criticised. Some of your items are blatantly ludicrous, e.g. cell phone handling, formaldehyde in flue [sic] shots*, soaps and cleaning agents that contain toxins (the question you’re answering is what toxins?), specific clothing made from hydrocarbons (that would be the emperor’s new clothes then; you can’t make clothes from hydrocarbons — they’re all gases, liquids of waxes!)

        It’s the concentration of potentially poisonous things you ingest or inhale that matters. Botulinum toxin (which is produced naturally by a bacterium, so must be good, right?) is lethal to mammals at a median dose of just 10 ng/kg, yet it’s used cosmetically (as Botox) to smooth skin wrinkles!

        Sorry, RG, but your comments cumulatively add you to the ranks of the ‘irrationally worried’. You are unknowledgeable about most aspects of biology and medicine and you therefore pick up material from the web without any basis to discriminate what’s reality from fantasy. When you read things that reinforce your cognitive biases you end up coming to blogs like this one and posting nonsense that’s not even consistent from post to post!

        *The highest amount of formaldehyde present in any vaccine is .02 mg per dose. An average two-month-old baby would have around 1.1 mg of formaldehyde circulating in their body, with higher naturally-occurring amounts for older children.” [https://www.publichealth.org/public-awareness/understanding-vaccines/goes-vaccine/]

      • But fluoride is naturally present in lots of peoples’ domestic water. It’s present in most brands of natural mineral water. It’s natural. Fluoride in toothpaste. Do you swallow toothpaste?

        • Although too much fluoride can stain the teeth while they are forming, and even damage them (look up fluorosis), in smaller quantities it strengthens them and prevents tooth decay and all the health problems that go with it.

          Interestingly there has been some research recently suggesting that gum disease may be implicated in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease (Porphyromonas gingivae – I hope I have remembered the name correctly – was found in all the brains examined of people who had died of Alzheimer’s, but only a few of the controls). OK, this was a case-controlled retrospective study and only about 30 or 40 brains were examined, but food for thought.

          I’m afraid I don’t know whether fluoride can help prevent gum disease. But while it may be RG’s toxin, to dentists it is an essential trace element.

          • So doc

            If fluoride is so good for you, and not toxic in high levels. If a little is good for you, then more should be even better.
            Go ahead, read the warning on the fluoride toothpaste tube, start munchin … and swallow.

          • I’ve just said that fluoride is toxic at high levels – can’t you read my post properly before replying to it?

            Almost anything that has an effect on the body is toxic at high enough levels, which I have also said , more or less, in an earlier post. It is completely wrong to say that if a small amount of something is good then more is better.

          • If fluoride is so good for you, and not toxic in high levels. If a little is good for you, then more should be even better.

            I don’t get this. To the best of my knowledge, no one has ever said that fluoride is not toxic in high levels. In fact, I am unaware (please enlighten me if you have better information) of any substance at all that is not toxic in high levels. One example:
            Water is not just good for you, it is a basic requirement for human life. The lack of it will kill you. Yet, as the sad reality of marathon runners (among others) has shown, it can also kill you if you have too much of it.

        • No, I don’t swallow toothpaste. In fact, since our bodies absorb through our mouths, I rinse out very well.
          That said…. I don’t use fluoride toothpaste. Fluoride in most natural water is much much lower levels, where I live Fluoride has been added to the drinking water.

          Have you read the warning on a toothpaste tube ?
          Hey Lenny, you swallow fluoride toothpaste if you choose, that’s your call.

  • I’ll answer that.

    I had a disc bulge in my low back from lifting. I took Motrin/Ibuprofen for a couple years as needed for pain and inflammation with fairly good success. My doctor suggested changing the med to something other to take caution of “damaging my organs” from prolonged use, he did a blood test to make certain and recommended the change. My doc initially prescribed the Celebrex, I found it no more effective than Ibuprofen. A friend of mine suggested Vioxx, so I asked the doc if I could try the Vioxx. My doctor complied and changed my prescription to Vioxx. However the Vioxx was no more effective than Celebrex. So, for a short time I reverted to Celebrex. Not much after that I concluded that neither of the COX-2 Inhibitors was as effective for me as Motrin/Ibuprofen. It was many months later before the news of Vioxx killing patients became public and the drug was pulled.

    That was almost 20 years ago. From my ordeal, I concluded that the change in medication my doctor recommended was largely a result of Pharma pushing newer and more expensive pills. It was also near that time that my distaste for modern medicine commenced. I eventually weaned myself of the Motrin, and learned other means of dealing with the back pain. Exercise and core strengthening, walking, good sitting and standing posture, and as needed I now take CBD oil if needed for pain relief…. and I’m doing quite well thank you.

    • You still haven’t explained how Vioxx nearly killed you.

      As Frank Odds has pointed out, in the study cited the absolute risk of (non-fatal) thrombotic events attributable to Vioxx was about 2% (or 1 in 50).

      • Sorry Dr. J, no

        You have enough information about the incident. All you really want to do is read between the lines, and dissect my post to discredit my experience. You folks here have no real interest in what I have to say.

        • That’s not true. I am not interested in discrediting anybody unless I think they pose a risk to others.

          However, you have said quite a lot of things that are rather vague, which means that it is necessary to read between the lines in order to get at what you are trying to say at all. I have made it clear when I am doing this so that you have had the opportunity to correct me if I have drawn the wrong inferences.

          You have also said things that contradict each other, and I will point that out if I think it is important.

          I suppose I am used to discussing and debating things with my friends and colleagues in academia, and nobody pulls their punches there. If anybody suggests something which they cannot justify they are torn to pieces. It is a good way of clarifying your thoughts, and in particular helping you to distinguish between what is known, what is conjecture and what is merely opinion. I also enjoy discussions with friends who are lawyers, but they are mainly interested in winning the argument, whereas academics primarily want to arrive at the truth. This is in contrast to politicians, who have no interest in the truth at all, only in whether they can convince people to agree with them.

          You have said a number of things in your posts which are not actually true at all (even if you genuinely believe them), and others which don’t seem to have been thought through. You surely don’t expect me, or anybody else with specific expertise, simply to sit back and keep quiet?

          “You have enough information about the incident. All you really want to do is read between the lines, and dissect my post to discredit my experience”
          Coming back to this, the information that you have given is that you have regularly taken a number of anti-inflammatory drugs, including Vioxx and others that are very similar, for a benign condition, and that you have had a serious heart attack, from which you have recovered. You have also stated that you have had a lifetime free of taking pills and remain in perfect health at the age of 65. What construction do you expect us to put on that?

          • @Julian

            Love the third para in your comment. My own attitude entirely. Some people (RG most recently) don’t seem to have the first idea how to interact in rational debate.

        • You folks here have no real interest in what I have to say

          True. We haven’t seen you contribute anything of interest, yet.

  • http://news.mit.edu/2019/how-tumors-behave-acid-0320

    Given the new (as of 3/20/2019) info from above link (tumors spread more aggressively in an acidic environment) it would seem that the basic idea behind bicarbonate cancer treatment has some scientific basis. The details and efficacy of the treatment are not fully quantified, but the potential to impact tumor growth seems to have factual support.

    What am I missing since this new information seems to provide some hope for this scam treatment?

    • “Sodium bicarbonate would not be a feasible cancer treatment because it is not well-tolerated by humans, but other approaches that lower acidity could be worth exploring”

      That kiboshes the sodium bicarbonate theory.

  • Riiiiiigggghhhttt, with respect Ernest, this is coming from you, the guy who spent most of his life learning how to maintain disease, and keep it going to maintain employment? and you’re claim to your own heroism? chemo? what that it works? at a whopping $100,000? its why most get sicker on it perhaps and most die maybe just maybe? what? by radiating our bodies through a microwave? and how much does are docs getting kickbacks? or any of the other FDA garbage? Perhaps the doctors of Europe who have been using Food Grade Hydrogen Peroxide curing cancer for the past 170 yrs are all scams too right? okay then….. have you tried either method or this is just because one gets happy punting someone else’s work? btw, our bodies have to be a tiny bit more acidic than alkaline to work best, 🙂 Besides if the person believes it will work it most likely will, study belief systems of the mind, and why not? how many of the prescription pills out there kill rather than help in any way at all, lets see, the answer is ‘most’ 99% of them. FDA have put out the medical books that you all supposedly educate yourselves with is what I read. 🙂

    • well-done Jane!
      you managed to write a comment in which nothing is correct – not even my name.
      a perfect display of ignorance.

    • Jane:
      My guess is that you used the “ever-better” Google Translate or DeepL or some such ridiculous gadget to craft this nonsense. Any human with a remaining neuron or two would not gibber like this. Actual translators may make the odd mistake, but these programs are masters only at making mistakes. That is also the difference between the doctors you despise (they may make the odd mistake) and the quacks you adore (they are all but guaranteed at getting most everything wrong).
      So please, for your own sake: learn to read, learn to understand what you read, learn to write an intelligible message and learn something about reality.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

If you want to be able to edit your comment for five minutes after you first submit it, you will need to tick the box: “Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.”
Recent Comments

Note that comments can be edited for up to five minutes after they are first submitted but you must tick the box: “Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.”

The most recent comments from all posts can be seen here.

Categories