These practitioners are years ahead of their time
Dr Nick Gonzalez (Please scroll down to see the full list)
The following article is from the late Dr Nick Gonzalez's website. For anyone interested in the use of supplements and nutrition to treat cancer please read the entire article (text below) with all links and footnotes here.
Enzyme Therapy and Cancer
By Nicholas Gonzalez, M.D.
The embryologist Dr. John Beard proposed in 1906 that pancreatic proteolytic digestive enzymes represent the body’s main defense against cancer, and that enzyme therapy would be useful as a treatment for all types of cancer. (1) Particularly during the first two decades of the twentieth century, Dr. Beard’s thesis attracted some attention in academic circles, and several case reports in the medical literature documented tumor regression and even remission in terminal cancer patients treated with proteolytic enzymes. (2-6) In 1911, Dr. Beard published a monograph entitled The Enzyme Therapy of Cancer and Its Scientific Basis, which summarized his therapy and the supporting evidence. (7) In my book The Trophoblast and the Origins of Cancer (co-authored with my colleague Dr. Linda L. Isaacs), I review Dr. Beard’s work from the perspective of contemporary molecular biology.
After Dr. Beard’s death in 1923, the enzyme therapy was largely forgotten. Periodically, other practitioners have rediscovered Dr. Beard’s work, and used pancreatic proteolytic enzymes as an alternative cancer treatment. (8)
Dr. Beard believed the enzymes had to be injected, to prevent destruction by hydrochloric acid in the stomach. However, recent evidence demonstrates that orally ingested pancreatic proteolytic enzymes are acid-stable (9), pass intact into the small intestine, and are absorbed through the intestinal mucosa into the blood stream as part of an enteropancreatic recycling process. (10,11)
I began researching the use of oral pancreatic proteolytic enzyme therapy as a treatment for cancer after completion of my second year at Cornell University Medical College in 1981. At that time, I had the opportunity to meet Dr. William Donald Kelley, the Texas dentist who for twenty years had been treating cancer patients with a complicated nutritional therapy based on Beard’s enzyme treatment. Although Kelley had been attacked in the press because of the unorthodox nature of his work, the Dr. Kelley I met was an unassuming man whose primary wish was to have his controversial work fairly evaluated by the academic medical world. I thought his request reasonable.
My research advisor at Cornell, Dr. Robert A. Good, at the time President of Sloan-Kettering, agreed to support a case review of Kelley’s patients, which I continued despite the rigors of third year medical school. During my fourth year at Cornell, I was given a considerable block of time under Dr. Good’s direction to investigate Kelley’s work and results in a more structured manner. Eventually, what began as a student project developed into a two-year formal research effort which I pursued during my formal immunology training.
During my study, I reviewed nearly 10,000 of Dr. Kelley’s patient records. I interviewed and evaluated intensively over 500 patients with appropriately diagnosed advanced cancer, and summarized my findings in an extended monograph completed in 1986 as partial fulfillment for my fellowship training. This monograph, entitled One Man Alone: An Investigation of Nutrition, Cancer, and William Donald Kelley, is now available through New Spring Press or on Amazon.
The written report consisted of several sections. In addition to outlining Kelley’s theoretical approach, I discussed at length 50 of his patients initially diagnosed with 26 different types of poor prognosis cancer, all of whom had enjoyed long-term survival and/or apparent regression of disease while following their nutritional regimen. As a separate chapter, I also evaluated all cases of unresectable pancreatic cancer, both compliant and non-compliant, who had come to see Kelley between 1974 and 1982. I eventually identified 22 patients in this group. For all of these patients, I obtained complete medical records, including death certificates for those who were deceased. I interviewed all surviving patients repeatedly and at length, and in the case of those who had died, I interviewed family members as well as the original attending physicians.
Ten of these patients had visited Kelley only once and had never followed the protocol: these individuals had been discouraged from proceeding largely because of the negative influence of family and physicians who thought Kelley to be an outright fraud. This population, with a median survival of only 60 days, served as a convenient control. Among the remaining 12 patients, I found a number who had survived far beyond what would be expected for the disease, including one patient with pancreatic cancer to the liver who had, when last contacted, been alive over twenty years from her original diagnosis. (Discoveries in Medicine review)
Despite the careful documentation and the five-year investment of time, no one in academic medicine could, at the time, accept that a nutritional therapy might produce positive results with advanced cancer patients.
In 1986, probably as a result of endless pressures, Dr. Kelley gave up research and patient care, and I myself did not speak to him or any of his associates after 1987. He passed away in January 2005. (Obituary of Dr. Kelley) In 1987, I decided to move to New York to try and salvage the enzyme approach, and observe for myself the results with poor prognosis cancer patients. My goal throughout has been to generate research support, so that this method, if it indeed proved to have value, could be integrated into general medical treatment.
In July of 1993, the then Associate Director for the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program at the National Cancer Institute invited me to present selected cases from my own practice as part of an NCI effort to evaluate non-traditional cancer therapies. Dr. Isaacs and I prepared for presentation 25 cases representing a variety of poor prognosis or terminal malignancies who had either enjoyed long term survival or tumor regression while following my program. (NIH newsletter description) Included in my presentation were patients diagnosed with advanced breast, lung, prostate and other cancers.
After the session, the Associate Director suggested we pursue a pilot study of our methods in ten patients suffering inoperable adenocarcinoma of the pancreas, with survival as the endpoint. He suggested pancreatic cancer because the standard survival for the disease is so poor, and an effect could be seen in a small number of patients in a short period of time. In fact, I was told that if three of ten patients lived a year, that would be considered a positive result. Nestec (the Nestle Corporation) agreed to fund the trial, which began in January 1994. The study has been completed and was published in the June 1999 issue (Volume 33, Number 2) of Nutrition and Cancer. Of 11 patients followed in the trial, 8 of 11 suffered stage IV disease. Nine of 11 (81%) lived one year, 5 of 11 lived two years (45%), 4 of 11 lived three years (36%) and two lived longer than four years. In comparison, in a trial of the drug gemcitabine, of 126 patients with pancreatic cancer not a single patient lived longer than 19 months. (12) (Abstract of Nutrition and Cancer article)
Subsequently, the National Cancer Institute, in conjunction with the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, approved funding for a large-scale controlled trial evaluating our approach against chemotherapy, again in patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. Unfortunately, despite our initial enthusiasm for the project, ultimately it was ineptly managed by the academicians involved. The supervisory personnel at Columbia admitted multiple patients into the nutritional arm of the study whom we believed failed to meet the very specific entry requirements, and who for the most part were far too sick to comply with our treatment. Our multiple complaints were largely ignored. Finally, at our request, the Office of Human Research Protection, an investigative arm of the National Institutes of Health, launched a full scale investigation of those in charge at Columbia. After more than two years, the OHRP determined that the Columbia staff had inappropriately approved 42 of the total of 62 patients entered into the study. More recently, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) completed its own investigation of the project, confirming my allegations of mismanagement. My book What Went Wrong exposes in detail the truth behind this clinical study. A brief summary of the problems with the trial can be found by clicking here.
In addition to these clinical trials, we have collaborated with basic science researchers to test our enzyme approach in animal models of pancreatic cancer. In May, 2004, the results of these studies were published in the peer-reviewed journal Pancreas. In these experiments, a very aggressive form of pancreatic cancer was induced in mice, then half the animals were given our pancreas product, half were given no therapy. Those treated with our pancreas product showed a significant improvement in survival and behavior compared to animals not receiving the enzymes. In a second experiment, tumor growth was substantially reduced, and survival prolonged again, in animals receiving the pancreas product. (13) (Abstract of article on enzyme therapy in mice) We want to emphasize that the results were particularly significant for a first attempt, since the investigators were using only the pancreas product part of our program, and did not use a variety of doses to determine the most optimal for a mouse. As the principal investigator of the study wrote in the conclusion of the article: “In summary, PPE (porcine pancreatic enzyme) is the first experimentally and clinically proven agent for the effective treatment of PC (pancreatic cancer). The significant advantages of PPE over any other currently available therapeutic modalities include its effects on physical condition, nutrition and lack of toxicity.”
In addition to the financial support from Nestle, from 1995-1998, Procter & Gamble invested considerable resources helping us refine our therapy. You can review statements of support from Pierre Guesry, M.D., former Vice President for Research at Nestle, and J.P. Jones, Ph.D., the retired Vice President for Health Care at P&G.
In January 2007, we published a lengthy article about our results in the peer reviewed journal Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine. (14) Here, Dr. Gonzalez discussed 36 patients diagnosed with a variety of advanced and poor prognosis cancer who responded to his treatment with exceptional survival and in many cases evidence of tumor reduction. These cases and more have now been published in the two volume book series, Conquering Cancer.
Dr. Gonzalez prescribed, and in the pilot study and in the animal experiments he used a formulation of pancreas product made to his strict specifications. In his experience, quality, manufacturing methods, and composition vary widely among commercially available preparations of pancreas product and/or proteolytic enzymes. The results of his studies cannot be used as validation for any other product, whether obtained from a health food store, a pharmacy or an Internet source.
Although his published research deals with pancreatic cancer, in his office he treated patients with all types of cancers. He also treated patients with a variety of other problems, ranging from chronic fatigue syndrome to multiple sclerosis. Each treatment protocol was individualized for each patient, regardless of the underlying problem.
The Gonzalez Protocol® itself is quite complex, but basically involves three components: diet, aggressive supplementation with nutrients and pancreas product (containing naturally occurring enzymes), and detoxification. The protocols are individualized and each patient receives a diet designed for his or her specific needs. The diets are quite variable, ranging from a pure vegetarian program to a diet requiring fatty red meat 2-3 times a day.
The supplement regimens are also individualized, and intense: each cancer patient consumes between 130 and 175 capsules daily. Non-cancer patients will require considerably fewer supplements per day. The supplement regimens include a range of vitamins, minerals, trace elements, anti-oxidants and animal glandular products, prescribed according to the particular patient’s needs and cancer type. These nutrients do not have a direct anti-cancer effect, but instead serve to improve overall metabolic function. In addition to these supplements, every cancer patient takes large quantities of pancreas product in capsule form, which he believed provided the main anti-cancer action.
The animal glandular products and pancreas product that he used are derived from animals raised in Australia and New Zealand, where there has been no history of BSE (mad cow disease) or other prion diseases such as scrapie. The animal husbandry regulations in Australia and New Zealand are the strictest in the world, and prohibit the feeding practices that have caused problems in other countries.
The third component of the protocol involves what he called “detoxification” routines. On this therapy, he found that as patients repair and rebuild, large amounts of metabolic wastes and stored toxins are released. As a result, patients routinely develop a variety of symptoms, most commonly described as “flu-like,” such as low grade fevers, muscle aches and pains, even rashes that we hypothesize result from low grade tumor lysis. “Detoxification” refers to procedures such as coffee enemas, which are believed by alternative practitioners to enhance liver function and in turn, the processing and excretion of metabolic wastes. The coffee enemas are done twice daily, and patients most commonly report symptomatic relief. (Click here for Dr. Isaacs’ article about these procedures.)
Coffee enemas have been discussed in the orthodox medical literature for the better part of this century. Many nursing texts routinely recommended coffee enemas (15), and the Merck Manual advocated coffee enemas as a stimulant in all editions from the first in 1898 through 1977. During the 1920s and 30s, coffee enemas were prescribed for a variety of conditions. (16-20) In terms of their physiological effect, studies have shown that the rectal instillation of fluids will stimulate gallbladder contraction and emptying. (21)
Of the hundreds of Kelley patients I interviewed during my research study, virtually every one reported significant symptomatic relief from the enemas. In his own practice patients repeatedly reported the same improved well-being and relief of symptoms after a coffee enema. The enemas, in his experience, appear to be safe: He had yet to document a single serious side effect either in the thousands of Kelley patients he evaluated, or in his own practice. However, Dr. Gonzalez did not encourage anyone to attempt coffee enemas except under the care of a knowledgeable physician.
(For further information, you may wish to order a book or a lecture recording. Recordings of lectures given by Dr. Gonzalez over the years to both lay and professional groups are available, and provide more intensive explanations of the program. Various audio recordings of Dr. Gonzalez are available on this web site.)
—
The references listed below, with the exception of references 7 and 8 (which are books), are available through the Nutritional Research and Educational Foundation.
1. Beard J. The action of trypsin upon the living cells of Jensen’s mouse tumor. Br Med J4, 140-141, 1906.
2. Campbell JT. Trypsin treatment of a case of malignant disease.JAMA48, 225-226, 1907.
3. Cutfield A. Trypsin treatment in malignant disease. Br Med J5, 525, 1907.
4. Goeth RA. Pancreatic treatment of cancer, with report of a cure.JAMA48, 1030, 1907.
5. Little WL. A case of malignant tumor, with treatment. JAMA50, 1724, 1908.
6. Wiggin FH. Case of multiple fibrosarcoma of the tongue, with remarks on the use of trypsin and amylopsin in the treatment of malignant disease. JAMA47, 2003-2008, 1906.
7. Beard J: The Enzyme Treatment of Cancer. London: Chatto and Windus, 1911.
8. Shively FL: Multiple Proteolytic Enzyme Therapy of Cancer. Dayton: Johnson-Watson, 1969.
9. Moskvichyov BV, Komarov EV, Ivanova GP. Study of trypsin thermodenaturation process. Enzyme Microb Tech8, 498-502, 1986.
10. Gotze H, Rothman SS. Enteropancreatic circulation of digestive enzymes as a conservative mechanism. Nature257(5527), 607-609, 1975.
11. Liebow C, Rothman SS. Enteropancreatic circulation of digestive enzymes. Science189(4201), 472-474, 1975.
12. Gonzalez NJ, Isaacs LL. Evaluation of pancreatic proteolytic enzyme treatment of adenocarcinoma of the pancreas, with nutrition and detoxification support. Nutr Cancer33(2), 117-124, 1999.
13. Saruc M, Standop S, Standop J, Nozawa F, Itami A, Pandey KK, Batra SK, Gonzalez NJ, Guesry P, Pour PM. Pancreatic enzyme extract improves survival in murine pancreatic cancer. Pancreas28(4), 401-412, 2004.
14. Gonzalez NJ, Isaacs LL. The Gonzalez therapy and cancer: a collection of case reports. Altern Ther Health Med13(1), 46-55, 2007.
15. McClain ME: Scientific Principles in Nursing. St. Louis: CV Mosby Company, 1950, p.168.
16. Bastedo WA. Colon irrigations. NEJM199(18), 865-866, 1928.
17. Bastedo WA. Colon irrigations. JAMA98(9), 734-36, 1932.
18. Friedenwald J, Morrison, S. Value, indications, limitations and technic of colonic irrigation. Med Clin of N Am, p.1611-1629, 1935.
19. Marshall JK, Thompson CE. Colon irrigation in the treatment of mental disease. NEJM207(10), 454-457, 1932.
20. Snyder RG. The value of colonic irrigations in counteracting auto-intoxication of intestinal origin. Med Clin N Am, p.781-88, 1939.
21. Garbat AL, Jacobi HG. Secretion of bile in response to rectal installations. Arch Int Med44, 455-462, 1929.
Years ahead of their time
Dr Nick Gonzalez (died 2015)
Dr Jerry Tennant
Dr Ben Warren
Dr Ben WIlliams PhD
Page extends down: Medical doctors ahead of their time
Dr Jerry Tennant on Cancer and Voltage
Dr. Jerry Tennant is a licensed and practicing MD. He is also a licensed with the Arizona Board of Integrative and Homeopathic Medicine and has a license under the Pastoral Medical Association. He currently runs a successful medical practice in Dallas, Texas.
The following piece which presents Dr Tennant's concepts on cancer is a highly edited transcript from Dr Tennant's youtube video: https://youtu.be/W4_8EE8a8YI
All chronic disease is caused by the body's inability to make new cells that work. All you need to remain young and healthy is sufficient cellular voltage for creating new cells and the raw materials to make healthy cells: amino acids, fats, minerals, glucose, vitamins, and minerals in proper amounts. pH in liquids is synonymous with voltage.
Potential hydrogen (pH) is an electronic term defined as the logarithm of minus 400 millivolts (pH 14 alkaline = electron donor = anti-oxidant) to plus 400 millivolts (pH 0, acidic = electron stealer = oxidant) In biology, the cellular range of pH is from 7.35 (-20 millivolts) to pH 7.45 (-25 millivolts) is normal. To make a new cell (healing) requires -50 millivolts. Cancer occurs at +30 millivolts. As cellular voltage drops, cellular oxygen levels drop, because the pH of water (voltage) determines how much dissolved oxygen the water can hold, regardless of the amount of oxygen available.
The function of the mitochondria in our cells is to produce energy. They are rechargeable batties, where uncharged ADP becomes charged ATP through a process called the Krebs Cycle. The Kreb cycle burns oxygen through normal respiration. In normal aerobic respiration (using oxygen), one fat molecule creates 48 ATP (units of energy). When there is a lack of oxygen due to low cellular voltage, normal respiration with the Kreb cycle is replaced by anaerobic fermentation (without oxygen), which only makes 2 ATP. This is a very inefficient method of producing energy that causes one to feel tired and sluggish. ATP is used in enzymatic functions, which are crucial to healthy body function.
In a low oxygen environment, the microbes in your body also start releasing digestive enzymes to digest nearby cells. Because the amount of oxygen that can be dissolved in water is dependant up the liquid's pH (or acidity which is also correspondent with voltage), low oxygen levels leading to anaerobic cellular metabolism (fermentation) occurs wherever there is low voltage. Low voltage results in 1) chronic pain, 2) lack of oxygen, 3) inefficient metabolism, 4) growth in viruses, bacteria, yeast, and fungus such as Candida, which is believed to have a role in causing cancer.
These mycotoxins can affect other areas of the body once they enter the bloodstream. 90% of the US population has low body voltage due to Hypothyroidism. That is low thyroid function, which is primarily caused by a lack of iodine. The hormone T3, which is produced by the thyroid, controls voltage and body temperature. Doctors only test for TSH and T4, so blood tests often show normal thyroid function when, in reality, there is a severe T3 deficiency.
When the body is Hypothyroid, your body crates Mucin, a primary ingredient in mucous, which is mistaken as fat. Mucin blocks blood flow in the tissues, resulting in high blood pressure and blocks insulin from reaching cell membranes: excessive mucin casues insulin resistance and Type II Diabetes. The medical community calls these symptoms Metabolic Syndrome: high blood pressure, high blood sugar, excess body fat around the waist, and abnormal cholesterol or triglyceride levels. Mucin makes the organs in the belly look fat, with a "beer belly." It also makes people feel tired and craves sugar and caffeine.
Another reason for low total body voltage is insufficient stomach acid (HCl). The stomach acid breaks proteins into amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins. The body cannot build cells with proteins. Proteins must be broken down into amino acids before they are used to build new cells. Because foreign bacteria and viruses are proteins, the body responds to all proteins in the bloodstream as foreign invaders with an immune response. Without enough stomach acid, the body absorbs proteins into the bloodstream through a leaky gut and then attacks these foreign proteins with an immune response. Most allergies are because people don't have stomach acid. People don't have the stomach acid because they don't have Iodine and B1, or because they're taking the purple pill (Prilosec or Zantac) Those cause the food allergies and low body voltage, which creates the microbe friendly environment and pain.
Another major cause of systemic low voltage is dental infections. 70% of the people Dr. Tennant sees are sick because of their teeth. Dental infections destroy mitochondria with thioethers, gliotoxins, and Mercury. One of the main things that damage the mitochondria in our cells is heavy metals like Mercury. Standard dental amalgam (silver) fillings contain 50% Mercury by weight. Every tooth is part of an electrical circuit or meridian that contains all the acupuncture points. Each circuit or meridian runs through an organ. Whatever happens to any given tooth also affects the organs in that electrical circuit. Microbes affecting that tooth give off powerful gliotoxins (if a fungus) or thioethers (if a virus), which creates a feedback loop of disease.
To get well, you must:
1) Fix your voltage. Remove dental amalgam silver fillings and root canals. Use the Tennant Biomodulator to measure electrical circuits. Put electrons in with the biomodulaor or use essential oils, homeopathics, or Tesla Lights.
2) Incorporate proper nutrition to correct deficiencies in iodine, especially, and iron, zinc, selenium, glutathione, cortisol, and progesterone. Marine plankton is a good source for these.
3) Detoxing & getting rid of microbes (MMS or homeopathics) To fix auto-immune diseases, fix the infection, by checking the voltage, then the auto-immune diseases fix themselves. All chronic disease is your inability to make new cells, or by some toxin that damages them once they get made. Genetic diseases are caused by toxins or by nutrient deficiency — genetic expression changes with nutrient deficiencies. Fulvic acid is used to control heavy metals, radiations, and allows cell membranes to open up and let nutrients in. Fix the fulvic, nitrox, fats, proteins, vitamins, minerals, voltage, and your body can then fix all chronic diseases.
We are constantly wearing ourselves out, so you get new cells in the macula of your eye every 48 hours, the lining of your guts replaced every three days, the skin you're sitting in today is six weeks old, your liver is eight weeks old, and your nervous system eight months old, so as cells wear out you have to make new ones. Or if the cells get damaged some way, you have to make new ones so chronic disease only occurs when you lose the ability to make new cells that work.
Dr Ben Warren on the Gut's effect on Health
Understanding Systemic Inflammation
The gut is where you break down the foods into the base nutrients so you can absorb them so you can rebuild your body. If the system is not working very well, you're not going to be absorbing nutrients very well. If you're not absorbing nutrients very well, you're not going to be building the 75 trillion cells that make up your body very well. 80% of your immune system, which protects you from the outside world, is also located in your digestive system. And one hundred percent of the t-regulatory cells that regulate your immune system is located in the digestive system. So your digestive system is the home to your immune system, and it's our largest surface area of exposure to the outside world. It's not our skin; it is our intestine.
The surface of your skins maybe a couple of square meters, while the surface area of your digestive system, particularly the small intestine, is 20 to 30 square meters. If you unfolded, it's a huge surface area, approximately 2 to 3 tennis courts. It has folds called villi to increase the surface area, to maximize the absorption of nutrients. It is the key to your digestion and your immune system. Whenever you eat food, your body and your body's immune system has to decide whether those foods could be invading bacteria or viruses. Bacteria and viruses are proteins. So your immune system is particularly alert to foreign proteins. Your body will look at all proteins and determine is that protein food, or is that protein a virus or bacteria. Your body has to differentiate with all the foods you reading whether it's food to digest, or should I attack it.
One of the common foods that we know is causing a lot of immune responses is gluten. In 70% of light-skinned Americans ( African-Americans are much better suited genetically to eating gluten) their immune system is tagging gluten as an invader. And then they're getting some immune reaction to that. This immune response does damage reaching far beyond the gut.
This immune response in the gut creates intestinal inflammation or leaky gut syndrome. The junctures in your intestines get loose, and then improperly digested foods, particularly proteins, can get into the bloodstream and cause an elevated immune response. This elevated immune response can cause multiple food intolerances, which may cause diarrhea, acid reflux, bloating, gas production. That can then lead to the up-regulation of the immune system and the pathogenesis of autoimmunity. In eighty to ninety percent of people who present with autoimmunity, it is coming from their digestive system.
A lot of people have gut issues that they don't even realize is a gut issue. When we start looking at this leaky gut affects the whole body. If you have a dairy intolerance, your body will dump out the antigens in your sinus tracts and give you a blocked up nose. Have a quick breathe in through your nose. You should be how to breathe through your nose if you haven't got a cold, and if you find that invariably you can't breathe through your nose, it's probably a good indicator that your body is tagging proteins, and dairy is not going to go well for you. This can lead to rheumatoid arthritis, fibromyalgia, and has a significant effect on your adrenal glands, which make your daytime hormone and energy production. So it leads to fatigue over time.
Obviously, there are the direct responses in the bowel and the colon, including constipation, diarrhea, irritable bowel disease, even Crohn's. All these aspects have a significant association with inflammation within the digestive system. And there are far-reaching effects in your thyroid, autoimmune conditions like Hashimoto's and Graves disease. Every case of underactive thyroid we've ever seen gluten has been a problem.
Systemic inflammation causes your liver gets overloaded. Toxins spill out through your skin. Immune molecules coming up through your skin, causing acne, rosacea, eczema and psoriasis. You'll also see depression, anxiety, ADHD, and massive association with mental disorders. What you eat directly affects how you think and feel.
When you start looking at the gut-brain axis, that brain axis is a three-way intersection between your brain and nervous system, your gut digestive system, and the microbiome, so the bacteria that live within your digestive constitute a significant player.
When you start looking at your digestive system, you need to look at your vagus nerve and the autonomic nervous system, which has two branches — the parasympathetic and sympathetic nervous systems. Your rest, digest, and repair system is parasympathetic. Your fight or flight stress response is sympathetic.
The vagus nerve, which is on the parasympathetic side, controls the flow of saliva, secretion of pancreatic enzymes, and stimulates the release of bile to be able to break down the fats. All of your digestive systems is on your parasympathetic side, which is your being relaxed side. Stress while eating, interferes with your ability to break down the foods. It's very difficult to shut off the flight or fight response and just relax without meditation. The relaxation responses can be induced through breathing because you can consciously control your breathing. And breathing directly controls your autonomic nervous system.
I'm a huge fan of diaphragmatic breathing, also called yoga breathing or baby breathing. Breathe into your tummy, so as you breathe in, the belly should go out. As you breathe in, your belly goes out. This is yoga-type breathing diaphragmatic breathing, which calms your nervous system down. That is going to help digestion. So tip number one is not to eat when you are feeling stress. Practice diaphragm breathing into your stomach and relax before and during your meals.
This is the movie and book that inspired this website
Surviving Terminal Cancer a movie based on Ben William's book
Surviving Terminal Cancer a synopsis of the movie.
"Surviving Terminal Cancer": https://vimeo.com/119006145
Glioblastoma is used as an example of incurable cancer, with a life expectancy of 12-18 months. The film shows three individuals that have lived for 15-20 years by doing their own research and developing their own treatments. All three men had a scientific background. One was an engineer. One was a physicist and molecular scientist. They were able to use their own analysis of existing research to find potential treatments, many of which are used widely outside the US, and also included off-label prescription drugs, that have shown success in treating their otherwise terminal diseases.
The movie then goes on to show a fundamental flaw in cancer research. It is now becoming more widely accepted in the cancer research and treatment communities that successful treatment of cancer will take a multi-step, or cocktail approach, using several different drugs in combination, as is used for HIV. However, the present paradigm of clinical research requires the elimination of all but one variable, so each drug is tested by itself. No researchers are even willing to look at the potential curative abilities of multiple drugs or other modalities in combination with drugs. In other words, every potential treatment for cancer that is not a single drug in the pipeline of pharmaceutical companies is routinely ignored by the medical and research communities. So that means that all non-patentable formulas, including all off-patent drugs, herbs, vitamins, minerals, amino acids that have shown significant results in early stages of research are not ever going to be fully researched and will never be available as part of a standard of care. Therefore under the present system, these unpatentable formulas can never be used to treat cancer. Even on-patent drugs that are approved for non-cancer treatments are rarely subsequently tested for use in cancer treatment.
All non-patentable formulas, including all off-patent drugs, herbs, vitamins, minerals, amino acids that have shown promise are not ever going to be properly researched. Therefore under the present system, they can never be used to treat cancer. Even on-patent drugs approved for non-cancer treatments are rarely subsequently researched for use in cancer treatment.
With HIV and childhood leukemia it was the combination of existing treatments that finally proved successful. Infectious disease treatments for Hep B, Hep C, HIV are now treated with multi-pronged, multi-agent, multi-targeted approaches with success. The idea of combination therapy has gained acceptance in the cancer research community. However research on mono therapy is much easier to carry out. From a regulatory approach it is very difficult to get studies going that test multiple agents, because with each new agent the variables rise exponentially. Too many variations, means that if the treatment did work, there would be no way to tell what actually did the healing. Multi-agent studies are not considered acceptable in the present system of clinical research. However when oncologists deny their patients the option to try multiple agents in combination, they ends up doing an extreme disservice to the patient, especially those that are facing terminal diseases.
Turmeric has shown great anti-cancer effects in numerous research studies. An extract of turkey tail mushrooms is used in nearly all cancer treatments in Japan. These examples show that highly potent and low-cost cancer treatments with no known side effects are getting zero play in the US medical system. With turmeric, the movie states that oncologists will tell their patients NOT to take turmeric or any natural remedy in conjunction with standard oncology care, because it may interfere with chemotherapy, even though the evidence to support that claim only exists in rare cases.
Targeted therapy means finding an inhibitor for a single gene or single protein. This has been the focus of modern research. In the era of genomics and proteomics it is clear that cancer is not based on a single gene or single protein. Cancer is a multi-genomic disease. The mindset of most of modern research is still trying to target single proteins or single genes, which according to Professor Aggarwal of MD Anderson Cancer center is destined for failure because it is based on the flawed single gene model.
The cost of bringing a new drug to market in the US is about a billion dollars. There have been no major cancers cured since the 1970's despite trillions of dollars going into cancer research. Given such poor results for single drugs in treating incurable cancer, investors are losing their appetite for investing in new research. There are better opportunities for investing capital. The inefficient mode of research has become so expensive, it has become a serious detriment to advances in treatment.
Another problem with the mindset of modern research is that there is much emphasis put in understanding mechanism of how a drug works. There are numerous examples in the medical history of great strides being made in developing drugs before the mode of action was understood. The practice of researching a drug before the mechanism of action is understood is generally frowned upon in modern medicine.
Other problems include all medical practice is standardized for all patients and pays almost no regard for individual variability among patients.
Because of competition between drug companies, they rarely are willing to cooperate in allowing other drugs to be used in combination with drugs from other companies.
The anti-malaria drug chloroquine is dirt cheap, has few side effects, and has now been shown to overcome the Glioblastoma's ability to develop resistance to chemotherapy. Even when human trials show the old drug to extend survival by 50%, the FDA has not approved it's use, because there is no big drug company that will push the use of this effective drug, because there is no profit in it.
Oncologists are reluctant to deviate from established best practices even in the cases of terminal prognosis. Doctors can be judged and sued for malpractice for merely doing anything outside the standard of care. In order to avoid such malpractice suits, hospitals often use a team of oncologists to develop treatment programs for their patients by committee. This is designed almost enttirely
Ben Williams used his self-study to cure himself and wrote a book, which the movie is based on and updates a database on the off-label drugs that have been shown to have anti-cancer effects. He criticizes the ethics of oncologists for preempting the decisions for treatment. They don't want to let their patients have any leeway in making decisions that move in the direction of alternative medicine. Ben claims that oncologists are concerned with their professional reputations, which can be ruined by any association with .
Richard Gerber PhD, a computer scientist, was diagnosed with Glioblastoma in 2006. He read Ben Williams and was able to use the recommended cocktail approach to successfully treat himself. He tried to find as many agents that would block pathways of mutation on himself. He confessed to his oncologist hat he was taking melatonin. She told him sternly that he shouldn't take melatonin. At that point he was taking 10 or 15 other pharmaceutical drugs, but realized that if his doctor wouldn't allow him to take melatonin, he couldn't tell her about the other drugs he was using. At one point he was taking 25 drugs. He realized that he was taking a big risk, but also recognized that he had to do something extreme of he wanted to live. At the time of the movie, Rich had lived 6 and a half years.
Stuart Stoneman PhD, an engineer diagnosed with glioblastoma in 2006, did his own research to conduct a risk benefit analysis on the cocktail approach and clearly showed that the off plan treatments should be tried. Unable to get the off-label drugs needed for his decided combination therapy he dies in 2014.
After the Nazi experiments, the international medical community accepted the founding principles of clinicians' ethical obligation, called the Nuremburg code and codified in 1964 with the declaration of Geneva as an extension of the Hippocratic oath. This eventually lead to a standard that required the use of an independent review board to approve all clinical trials. The standard states that concern for the interest of the individual subject must always prevail over interest of science and society. The use of double blind studies on terminal cancer patients does not adhere to this principle, because half of the subjects are not provided any therapy. On the other hand when terminal patients are asked if they are willing to take some additional risk at the chance of surviving by taking off-label drugs, they almost always say yes. Should patients be offered the opportunity to fight for their lives.
The movie also gives examples of physicians, ahead of their time that receive illogical and extreme punitive reactions for challenging existing dogmas. Ignaz Semmelweis, a Hungarian medical doctor who practiced in the 1840's, suggested that physicians could reduce mortality to both mother and newborn by washing their hands between performing autopsies and delivering babies. Even with overwhelming statistical evidence showing the effectiveness of the practice, he was ridiculed and ostracized by the medical establishment, in part because his suggestions predated the acceptance of the gem theory. Without a substantial theory for the mechanism as to why the practice worked he was dismissed and ridiculed, which was no doubt extremely frustrating as he knew that the simple act of washing hands could save lives.
The Semmelweiss reflex is a term used to describes the reflex-like tendency to reject new evidence or new knowledge because it contradicts established norms, beliefs or paradigms.
Barry Marshall, an little known Autrailian physician, suggested that stomach ulcers were caused by the bacteria H. pylori in the 1980's, challenging decades of medical doctrine holding that ulcers were caused primarily by stress, spicy foods, and too much acid. The H. pylori theory was ridiculed by established scientists and doctors, who did not believe that any bacteria could live in the acidic environment of the stomach. Marshall was quoted as saying in 1998 that "everyone was against me, but I knew I was right." His paper remained unpublished because of the total acceptance of a mistaken dogma. With no other option, he infected himself onstage at a medical convention which casued an ulcer. He was able to cure himself with the use of antibiotics and later became a Nobel Lauriat.
Emile Freireich, MD received fierce resistance to using a combination therapy for childhood leukemia, which turned out to be successful. He claims that the way he developed innovations in 1960 would not be possible today. He says that reforming regulations is the most important thing to do in advancing health in the world. Promising drugs or treatments are often withheld from the newly diagnosed and are only experimented in patients with recurring cancer. Freireich points to the bypassing of stage three clinical trials in drugs used to treat aids, as a model for how advances in cancer treatment could rapidly progress. It was only because of the political activism of AIDS activists in groups like ACT UP that stage two drugs that showed effectiveness, objective response, objective survival was enough. You need reproducibility and lack of bias. You don't need blinded randomization. This model has yielded few results in the many years it has been applied to GBM. The adaptive trial design is a better model is more sophisticated, using genomic testing to provides access to life saving drugs in personalized medicine.
More homogeneous patients would allow for
Former FDA commissioner Andrew Von Eschenbach says "if we don't change the regulatory process the biomedical model for research is already collapsing. Investment are dwindling because there are better opportunities for venture capitalists to invest their money, than hoping that a molecule will make it through a 10 to 15 year process to hopefully give you some return on your money.
Professor Mark-Eric Halatasch from University of Ulm in Germany has founded a organization for the advancement of treatment for GBM. His initial protocol involved 17 drugs, which are approved for non cancer treatments, and have a safety profile. There is a rational basis for thinking these compounds are effective and they have a reasonable and justifiable risks, even though we may not have a complete understanding of how the risks ad up when the substances are combined.
in April 2013 the International Initiative for Accelerated improvement in Glioblastoma Care published a research paper describing the use of a cocktail of 9 repurposed drugs to treat GBM in Oncotarget, an open access journal. The paper is available here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3720600/.
There are concerns within the medical establishment that if such an approach was to work, that patients will no longer be willing to accept existing standards of care from their physicians.
Andres Ferry PhD isa physical chemist diagnosed in 1999.He began using off label drugs, up to 8 at one time, and lots of nutraceuticals. He was
the film "Surviving Terminal Cancer," features Professor Emeritus Ben Williams, at University of California, San Diego, shouldn't be here today. He should be one of the statistics — 1 of the more than 15,000 people who die from glioblastoma multiforme in the U.S. every year. Yet, he's alive — 19 years after his initial glioblastoma multiforme diagnosis. His survival was brushed off as a rare fluke by his doctors, but Williams believes otherwise.
Here is the surviving terminal cancer website: https://www.survivingterminalcancer.com/
Some abandoned drugs have shown promise for glioblastoma multiforme, but they're not offered to U.S. patients. While I'm not in favor of over-prescribing medications, if you're facing a deadly prognosis you're probably willing to risk the side effects if it gives you a chance for survival.
High-dose tamoxifen, a breast cancer drug, is one medication that has shown some promise in treating glioblastoma multiforme. The antimalaria drug chloroquine is another. There's even a good chance your neuro-oncologist may be aware of the promising studies done with these drugs, but he or she won't offer them as a potential treatment because they're considered experimental.
https://www.sciencealert.com/this-malaria-drug-is-having-an-amazing-effect-on-brain-cancer-patients
http://resources.omniwellness.in/control/pdf_bp/Curcumin-Free-Turmeric-B.Agrwal-1529.pdf
