I have no interest in Patrick Swayze's expertise on modern medicine, but this "article" on "Natural News" dot com brings up some common misconceptions regarding the pharmaceutical industry and medicine in general... along with some downright silliness:
http://www.naturalnews.com/025289.html
Basically, the author laments the fact that Patrick Swayze has chosen to treat his pancreatic cancer with the current standard of care... which also happens to be the most effective treatment that we know of. Granted, pancreatic cancer is a horribly devastating disease, and the treatments we do have are not very effective.
The mainstream medicine group that has failed to conquer cancer for half a century has clearly gotten into Swayze's head. These are the same MD's and oncologist who will more often than not advise a person to not take antioxidants when having chemo, though there have been no reliable studies to support such advice and many which dispute it. The mainstream chemo theory is to weaken and destroy the cancer cells with chemical poison which also weakens and destroys the rest of the body's cells and organs in the often misplaced hope that the symptoms of cancer (tumors and cancer cell masses) will somehow be eliminated before the treatment itself kills the patient.
I have no idea what that sentence about antioxidants even means, but the author brings up one important point. It's true that modern oncology employs a method of poisoning the cancer, and cancer poison is often toxic to non-cancer cells. Drug developers try design a molecule that acts like a wrench in the gears of the machinery driving the growth of a cancer cell. Since tumor cells are essentially just normal cells that have gained the ability to grow uncontrollably, almost any poison designed to kill a cancer cell will likely kill other cells in your body. The idea is to design drugs that are more toxic to cancer cells than any other cell of the body. So, the scientists have two choices. We can either exploit the specific trait (often a mutation) that causes the cancer to rapidly divide. Or, since most cells of the body don't divide as fast as most cancer cells, we can target all rapidly dividing cells. Either way, the theory is that cancer cells should have a larger response to the drug than any other cell in your body.
Every cancer drug can be viewed through a biological "cost vs benefit" analysis. You want to maximally kill the tumor and minimally kill the rest of your body. Often times these drugs are administered at what is known as the, "maximum tolerated dose" or "MTD." That is, the patient will be prescribed the most drug possible, just short of the most severe side effects. Usually, this means the patient will not die from the drug, but will become nauseous, dizzy, weak, and sore all over. It can be awful, and there's great incentive to make newer drugs with fewer side effects without sacrificing any anti-tumor effects. With all that said, remember that in the case of pancreatic cancer, about 95% of the patients will die within the first 5 years after diagnosis. So, how would you dose a drug to pancreatic cancer? Wouldn't you want to hit that cancer with everything the doctors have? If I were a patient, I'd be pushing for MTD.
But, what's the alternative? What does "natural medicine" have to say on the topic?
Though pancreatic cancer is a very aggressive and difficult cancer to beat, two natural items featured here at Natural News have been particularly successful against pancreatic cancer: oleander and black cumin seed oil.
Are you shitting me? oleander and black cumin seed oil? Ok... what are the survival rates of patients who take these wonder "herbs?"...
Beuler? ...
Bueler?
He continues without stats:
Despite a decades long continual stream of pronouncements about annual progress and new cures and treatments being just around the corner, more people continue to contract and die from cancer every year. Not coincidentally, more money is spent on cancer treatments each year as well. Cancer is an almost $400 Billion a year industry. The only way it can maintain and increase it's profits is by NOT finding a cure. The legacy of not finding a cure and putting profits before healing can be found in our nation's graveyards, where millions of bodies lie of those who were taken from their friends and families and sent to early graves before their time.
Tony Isaacs, you're a dipshit. Suppose for one moment that you're diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. How much would you pay for a cure? How much do you think Patrick Swayze would pay? I know it's a gruesome topic, but since you brought it up, I'll go there with you. The number of dead bodies is not proof of a mass conspiracy to suppress cancer cures. There is no incentive for any pharmaceutical company to keep patients dying of disease. Dead people don't pay the bills. Pharmaceutical companies make money when they find cures. I'm not saying the business is all roses, but someone needs to call a spade what it is. You're actually advising people to ignore clinical data that - at worst - extends the life of dying people, and at best offers a cure, for what? oleander and black cumin seed oil? herbs and positive thoughts?
If you actually made it through Mr Isaacs' drivel, you may have noticed that he found three quotes to close his attack on "modern medicine." It just so happens that one has been dead for almost 2,300 years (Hippocrates) one for 14 years (Linus Pauling) and the last is not dead, but close, and he's a downright kook and social pariah in the scientific community (James Watson, although I highly suggest you go to see him if he's speaking near you, just for laughs).
As if Mr. Isaac's "natural" garbage wasn't enough, it looks like his peers want to add their woo to the ever growing list of federally supported rights:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123146318996466585.html
I can see it now, not only are these jerks promoting oleander for pancreatic cancer treatment, but they want the taxpayer to foot the bill.
15 comments:
You cant see whats right in front of you, idiot.
Care to elaborate?
So I am a dipshit am I? Have YOU researched and written a book about oleander? Do you even have a clue about it? If you did, you would know that it has been used medicinally for over 3500 years and was first reported to be used against cancer by the Egyptians in the 8th century AD.
You might also know that two oleander extracts are currently in FDA trials. Or you might know that the oleander extract that ultimately was patented as Anvirzel (one of the two drugs currently in trials) has been used with tremendous success by Dr. H. Zima Ozel for over 40 years now and is currently imported into the US via FDA exception rule and used both as a standalone drug and as a CAM treatment by an increasing number of individuals and mainstram doctors.
It is possible you might have discovered that an oleander herbal extract known as Sutherlandia OPC has been used for over 5 years in South Africa and has been well over 90% successful against a broad range of cancers and virtually 100% successful at reversing HIV symptoms.
Maybe you should take your foot out of your mouth and your head out of your nether region and educate yourself before you further demonstrate your ignorance and write without knowing what you are talking about.
You could start by reading the Oleander Series of articles here:
http://www.tbyil.com/articles.htm
Don't miss the mainstream studies by Doctor Newman, the report about Oleander inducing autophagy in pancreatic cancer cells and the report of the clinical trial for HIV in South Africa.
When it comes to black cumin seed (Nigella sativa), of which the prophet Muhammed said was a cure for everything but death, you may want to look at this article:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080519092215.htm
Or even another one of my dipshit articles:
http://www.naturalnews.com/025453.html
It is possible you might be interested to know that there are users of Anvirzel who are still alive after being given terminal diagnoses for pancreatic cancer years ago. The last two pancreatic cancer patients had their cancer completely gone at six months in one case and completely arrested at six months in the other.
And finally, I have hosted a Yahoo Health group named "oleandersoup" for over five years which now has over 1100 members. No one who has come to our group with more than weeks left to live and who had not had their immune system and major organs devastated by chemo and/or radiation is not still alive today. And only three people total are not still alive (two in their final weeks after years of chemo and one who followed the protocol for less than two months and then listened to his oncologist who told him nothing would save him and he should just get a nerve block to live out his last two or three months in less pain - and he proceeded to live over a year past the estimation).
Speaking of dipshit or any kind of shite - when you step in it, your really step deep don't you?
: )
Best regards,
The dipshit Tony Isaacs
PS - Don't dare "rub oleander" on anything - it is a highly toxic plant in raw form, though not so when properly prepared by boiling, condensing and straining according to aexact procedures.
With your bashing of Tony Isaacs you make absolutely no case for addressing cancer using chemo treatments. Actually, you paint a rather dim picture and, in doing this, reinforce what Mr. Isaacs asserts. Chemo kills cells, the good and the bad and the only hope you give is that minimizing the destruction of good cells is the only option. What a deal. Chemo also destroys organs and further compromises a weakened immune system leaving the bodies defenses for infection and further disease at high risk.
The picture you paint with regard to the side effects of chemo isn't very attractive either.
"Usually, this means the patient will not die from the drug, but will become nauseous, dizzy, weak, and sore all over. It can be awful . . ."
No, sir, it's beyond awful. It's devastating for the patient.
The hope you offer with regard to pancreatic cancer is also rather dismal. An extension of life. Shouldn't someone seeking help be able to look forward to total healing? With a promise of "extension of life" the battle is lost. The patient goes into treatment with no hope, just as we see in Patrick Swayze's interview with Barbara Walters. We saw a defeated man. Yet, this is what he trusts. And it is a pity.
I will go one step further. How many times is cancer cured by chemo and radiation? We have remissions. Remission is not a cure. The cancer almost always returns and too many times with a vengeance. The regular routine is more chemo, then hospice. A few lucky ones are cured. I believe it is 2% Big whoop. So what happens is all those patients going through treatments hope that their odds fall in that 2% bracket. Not very promising.
Treating cancer looking at the cause, a weakened immune system is what is in order. Drugs made by man never work. Nature does.
You said that if you were a cancer patient you would go for broke with chemo treatments hoping for the best? And what would that best be a mere extension of life with no quality thereof due to the side effects you would be suffering?
Your entire blog offers no hope. Looks to me like you are the dip shit.
In all fairness, there's no end of alternative medicine and treatments that are questionable, if not downright quackery. Oleander and black cumin seed just aren't two of them, and the same can be said for many others.
Ten years or so ago I would have agreed and if I had never researched oleander I would likely think anyone who suggested it for anything but rat poison was nuts too. I would suggest though that Mr. Holderfield not jump to conclusions the next time something is outside his knowledge or comfort zone and not label someone a dipshit or call what they write drivel without a bit of homework.
Dquixote1217,
You've given me a lot to respond to, so forgive me if I pick and choose. I'll do my best to address the bulk of your comments.
Anvirzel is in phase II clinical trials. It passed phase I and is determined a safe treatment, but showed no effect on tumor response. It's been in phase II for two years with no new data.
I found a small handful of publications on Oleandrin. It looks like it is an efficacious NFK-b pathway inhibitor (though, Mr. Newman first claimed that it inhibited the AKT pathway) at around 5 micromolar concentration (here's a link to the paper). Forgive me if I am underwhelmed. That's a lot of compound to treat with. There are a lot of compounds that will inhibit all sorts of enzymes at micromolar concentration. To me, that means it's not a very good inhibitor. Although, I have to say that it's worth following up. But, the fact that Mr Newman previously reported that oleandrin inhibits AKT and activates ERK siglanling in addition to inhibiting NFK-b suggests that oleandrin is a non-specific inhibitor. I'd like to see how it does on a panel of kinases. Or, maybe we should just keep waiting for the phase II trails of Anvirzel.
as to this comment:
"It is possible you might have discovered that an oleander herbal extract known as Sutherlandia OPC has been used for over 5 years in South Africa and has been well over 90% successful against a broad range of cancers and virtually 100% successful at reversing HIV symptoms."
Well, give me a reference. Show me the data. Then we'll talk.
"It is possible you might be interested to know that there are users of Anvirzel who are still alive after being given terminal diagnoses for pancreatic cancer years ago. The last two pancreatic cancer patients had their cancer completely gone at six months in one case and completely arrested at six months in the other."
Yes, I am interested. Please show me the data.
Mr Isaacs, I am not opposed to anything that works. If it's oleander, cumin seed, or chicken soup, I don't care as long as it works. But, I don't buy this argument that a treatment or compound is better or safer if it's produced by a plant. And, I certainly don't believe that drug companies are suppressing any "natural" cures. Suppose for the sake of argument that oleandrin is shown to be an effective treatment for pancreatic cancer, will it still be "natural" if Pfizer produces the compound? Or, will it then be merely another "man made chemical?" Just so you know, if oleandrin is an effective NFK-b inhibitor, then it is - by definition - a "chemical poison." And, there will be a therapeutic index, and it will be used just like any other chemotherapy agent.
Not only do your comments not make sense, but they're insulting. I work full time looking for cures to cancer and I'm not afraid or uncomfortable of where that cure may come from. If a drug kills cancer, then I'm all for it. But advocating a treatment that has - as of yet - never been demonstrated to effectively slow, stop or reduce tumor growth is dangerous and foolish. That's why I think you're foolish. I'm ok with oleandrin if it proves to work. I'm not ok with advocating clinical use of a treatment before it's been proven.
Mayluella,
"I will go one step further. How many times is cancer cured by chemo and radiation? We have remissions. Remission is not a cure. The cancer almost always returns and too many times with a vengeance. The regular routine is more chemo, then hospice. A few lucky ones are cured. I believe it is 2% Big whoop. So what happens is all those patients going through treatments hope that their odds fall in that 2% bracket. Not very promising."
There are many cancers that now have treatments and save lives at a very high rate. Take a look at Hodgkin's lymphoma. Or, more recently, CML patients taking Gleevec. When we know the biology of the cancer and we can effectively target the driving agent, then we can successfully produce efficacious drugs. In the case of pancreatic cancer, they are largely driven by a mutation that we, as of yet, have not been able to successfully target. But, I believe we will. It just hasn't happened yet... by the way an NFK-b inhibitor isn't likely to do the job.
Mayluella,
I missed this comment before, but a "weakened immune system" is not "the cause of cancer." The cause of cancer is somatic mutation. No amount of immune boosting herbs is going to save a person from a few powerful oncogenes.
Another good takedown of Tony Isaacs' ludicrous misconceptions about cancer and "natural therapies" can be found here:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/01/abusing_celebrities_with_cancer_to_sell.php#comment-1315044
Thanks for the link. I'm glad I'm not the only one who found this article absurd.
For those who don't know Dquixote1217 is Isaacs in disguise and Luella may is his crony who helps him run his death promoting books and website.
Dquixote seems like a fitting name for Mr Isaacs, IMO.
Matthew,
This is Mr Isaacs' evidence regarding Oleander as a cure for HIV: http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1514370#i
Mr Isaacs and his pals Luella May and Chris Beckett have done us the honour of visiting our little blog as well - and a very enlightening experience it was: http://anaximperator.wordpress.com/2008/11/09/simoncini-scam-murderer/#comment-365
Thanks very much for this blog.
Thanks for the comments, Beatis.
I skimmed through the comments on your blog, looks like you have quite a discussion going on there. I have to say that I really feel for people and families like Natalie's. I'm sure if I were in her shoes I would be grasping for anything that looked like hope too. All you can really do for someone in that situation is give them the best information you have and hopefully help them make an informed decision about treatment. It really is a personal choice. But, I don't think there is anything to do with people like Mr Isaacs... other than point out the misinformation time and time again. I still don't know if he is crazy, slow or intentionally deceptive. Whichever it is, he is definitely wrong.
Thank you for your reply. I feel for Natalie too, very much so. Her mother died some time after, she posted it on the blog. She and I are still in contact, she's a very sweet and brave girl and is doing fine, despite her great loss.
Post a Comment