Cancer Care News

Cancer Treatment Intrigue Neutrophil Infusion Therapy

2008-01-30T13:59:00.000-08:00

There is growing intrigue surrounding the work of Zheng Cui MD, PhD, the pathologist at Wake Forest University who announced in 2003 that his laboratory had found: (a) a totally cancer-proof mouse; (b) bred this mouse to produce 800 totally cancer-resistant offspring; (c) failed to conduct a follow-up study, as promised, that would identify the single gene that produced this unusual immunity (mice and human share about 95% of the same genes), (d) identified neutrophils, a type of white blood cell, as being primarily responsible for this unusual immunity against cancer; (e) then announced his laboratory had conducted an unpublished human study and found some people exhibit the same complete cancer resistance as the mice in his laboratory, and that (f) his lab had gained FDA approval to conduct a human study in the summer of 2008 where white blood cells from cancer resistant humans would be infused into the veins of cancer patients.

Of considerable interest was the discovery that cancer-resistant humans could only be found in summer months, likely due to higher seasonal vitamin D levels. Vitamin D is known to heighten the immune response. A recent study shows supplemental vitamin D reduces the risk for cancer by 60-77%. [American Journal Clinical Nutrition 2007 Jun; 85(6):1586-91]

Dr. Cui, in a taped presentation, briefly alludes to vitamin D but suggests that investors have approached him to provide research money towards the development of a profit-making treatment. Basically, cancer research goes where the money is, and that is what Dr. Cui succinctly said.

A deeper investigation reveals neutrophil infusion therapy to treat cancer is not new. It apparently cured (resulted in total remissions) among leukemia patients in the 1970s.

The first successful neutrophil infusion treatments were performed in the early 1970s to treat infections, and in one study there was greater survival (46%) among patients receiving neutrophil infusions than antibiotics (30%). But more remarkably, where enough neutrophils could be obtained, usually from family members, 12 of 12 patients survived who underwent at least 4 neutrophil infusions. [Modern Transfusion Therapy, Volume II, Janice P. Dutcher, CRC Press, 1990] This type of early study, despite its drawbacks, raises eyebrows in today’s world where antibiotic resistance results in the death of many thousands of hospitalized patients. Did modern medicine pass over a life-saving treatment for infectious disease?

In 1975 Donald Higby MD and Edward Henderson MD of the Roswell Park Memorial Institute in New York, reported that 13 of 17 leukemia patients receiving granulocyte (neutrophil) infusions plus antibiotics went into complete remission while only 3 of 19 patients receiving antibiotic treatment alone entered remission.

At the time, Higby and Henderson said “interest in granulocyte transfusion therapy has increased explosively concurrent with the development of more aggressive chemotherapeutic and radiotherapeutic treatment of cancer.”

Granulocyte infusion therapy is another term for injection of neutrophils from donors into cancer patients. What these doctors were saying is that stronger cancer treatment destroys the very immune system that is needed to ward off cancer. Higby and Henderson said these transfusions should be made available to every patient undergoing treatment that attacks the bone marrow.

As background information, leukemia is cancer of the blood. It emanates in the bone marrow. Harsh treatment (chemo, radiation) is directed at the bone marrow which results in destruction and decline in neutrophils, with predictable infections among these patients. It is the post-treatment infections that kill most leukemia patients. Higby and Henderson noted that in 79% of 450 patients, infection was the main or complicit cause of death with blood cancers. So neutrophil infusion therapy should have continued to be practiced.

But nay sayers point to a study where neutrophil infusion therapy failed in 71% of patients treated for invasive fungal infection. There were side effects too, fever and chills, nausea and vomiting.

For various reasons, neutrophil infusion therapy began to fall into disfavor in the late 1980s.

There was also resistance from patients. Infusion candidates themselves began to resist overtures to undergo infusion therapy. There was growing concern that donors could infect patients with HIV or hepatitis.

One of the technological challenges that kept neutrophil infusion therapy in the closet over the past three decades is that yields of white blood cells from donors were small and neutrophils only live a few short hours in storage. [Annual Reviews Medicine 26: 289-306, 1975] Plentiful amounts of neutrophils are needed for successful treatment.

In a review of the past research, investigators state that doctors lost interest in neutrophil infusion therapy over time because of difficulties in obtaining sufficient numbers of neutrophils to produce effective therapy, and because there were improvements in antibiotic therapy. Unfortunately, these so-called “advances” eventually led to the problem of antibiotic resistance.

Neutrophil infusions of more than a million cells are needed to reduce the number of patients dying of infection or cancer. Among the modern advances in infusional immune therapy is the discovery and development of recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor which boosts neutrophil volume, as well as advances in blood cell collection techniques, which now make it possible to transfuse larger numbers of neutrophils. [Journal Infectious Disease 183: 321-28, 2001]

What is odd is that modern medicine is now taking a second look at neutrophil infusion therapy because of the availability of granulocyte colony stimulating factor even though the data do not strongly support the liberal use of growth factors among patients with neutropenia (shortage of neutrophils).

Neutrophil infusion therapy is complicated. The cells last for only 24 hours and must be stored at room temperature. Blood typing must be done to avoid graft-host disease, which can be mortal. Neutrophils must be irradiated prior to infusion, to reduce the risk for graft-host disease, but fortunately this doesn’t destroy the ability of neutrophils to literally “blow apart” cancer cells. [Infections in Oncology, Infectious Disease Clinics of North America 327-43, 1996]

With all of these challenges, there is renewed interest in neutrophil infusion therapy, which is now being called “the comeback kid.” [Medical Mycology 44: S383-86, 2006]

The stunning realization that modern medicine has known for decades that neutrophils are the dominant force in preventing and treating cancer, and banished the treatment to narrowly fight infections that emanate from cancer treatment rather than cancer itself, is difficult to fathom.

As the dominant player in the innate immune system, ignoring neutrophils is like ignoring Godzilla in your living room. It was known decades ago that low neutrophil count precedes infection and cancer. [Seminars Oncology 2: 361-68, 1975; Scandinavian Journal Heamatology 18: 317-25, 1977] The toxic effect of neutrophils on germs was demonstrated in 1975 in a report published in the Journal of Experimental Medicine. [Journal Experimental Medicine 141: 1442-47, 1975]

In October of 1974 researchers reported that they treated 25 humans with bladder cancer by infusion with “pig lymph node lymphocytes” (white blood cells), with “clinical benefit” for some patients. [British Journal Surgery 61: 825-27, 1974] In 1977 a report in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine concluded that transfusion of neutrophils “appears to offer a survival advantage to infected, persistently neutropenic patients.” [New England Journal of Medicine 296: 706-11, 1977]

Neutrophil (granulocyte) infusions even underwent a trial at the National Cancer Institute in 1977. [Progress Clinical Biological Research 13: 267-80, 1977]

It is important to establish that modern medicine knew of the importance of neutrophils in the prevention and treatment of cancer early on, at least by the 1970s. It is also important to show that the resurgent interest in neutrophil infusional therapy is spawned by the availability of granulocyte colony stimulating factor, to overcome the lack of sufficient cells to infuse into cancer patients. But is granulocyte colony stimulating factor the only way to boost the neutrophil count?

To digress back to Dr. Zheng Cui at Wake Forest University where the world awaits, with great anticipation, his upcoming human research study in the summer of 2008, where cancer patients will be infused with white blood cells (largely neutrophils) from healthy donors. These donors will likely be given the growth factors to boost their neutrophil count.

But why is Dr. Cui waiting for summertime? Obviously, this is when solar ultraviolet exposure produces natural vitamin D3, which then activates the innate immune system, which is comprised mostly of neutrophils. The normal range of neutrophils in a blood sample is 1600 to 8000, which is an 8 times difference. The normal range for vitamin D drops to 1200 for blacks who don’t produce as much vitamin D from sun exposure.

Did nobody notice before, not one doctor or lab technician in the entire medical profession, that neutrophil counts rise in summer and decline in winter? Dr. Cui waits for the earth to tilt back to its summer position when there is less atmosphere to filter out solar ultraviolet rays that produce natural vitamin D in human skin. But why wait for the earth to navigate into the right position when vitamin D pills are widely available?

So when did modern medicine first recognize that vitamin D boosts the human immune system?

It has long been known that vitamin D-deficient children with rickets are commonly prone to infection. Russian researchers reported in 1965 that ultraviolet radiation enhances the ability of neutrophils to move toward germs or cancer cells. [“Effect of multiple irradiations with ultraviolet rays on the phagocytic activity of rabbit neutrophils.” Gig Sanit 30: 108-10, 1965] Another similar report was published in the British Journal of Dermatology in 1984. [British Journal Dermatology 111: 567-70, 1984]

There are likely to be even earlier records, but at least by 1976 researchers knew that a lack of vitamin D impairs the motility of neutrophils. [Acta Paediatrica Scandinavia 65: 695-99, 1976]. In 1981 researchers reported that vitamin D3 targets white blood cells that have vitamin D receptors on their surface and that a shortage of vitamin D also impairs the “motility” (travel) of white blood cells to seek and destroy cancer cells. [Calcified Tissue International 1981; 33(6):673-6]

More recently, researchers in Japan report that vitamin D3 primes bone marrow to produce precursor cells that eventually become neutrophils and that vitamin D3 works synergistically with granulocyte colony stimulating factor to boost immunity. [Hormone Metabolism Research 2004 Jul; 36 (7):445-52]

A case is report where a patient with a congenital condition that results in a severely low neutrophil count, who had a very low vitamin D level, was treated successfully with granulocyte colony stimulating factor. Oddly, this young patient was not treated with vitamin D. [Pediatrics 108: E54, 2001]

To get back to the main question, why is Dr. Cui waiting for the summer sun to boost the activity and volume of neutrophils when this could be accomplished with vitamin D pills?

Dr. Cui’s neutrophil donors are likely to receive granulocyte colony stimulating factor, but will they be given vitamin D? There will likely be a health survey form filled out by donors and it will likely inquire if donors are supplementing their diet with vitamin D supplements. The survey may even inquire about sun exposure. It’s not like the Wake Forest researchers are oblivious to vitamin D.

The dots have been connected between neutrophils, granulocyte colony stimulating factor, vitamin D and human immunity against cancer. Why are cancer researchers charting a more difficult course, to obtain neutrophils from donors, at great expense and risk of graft-host disease, when the cancer patient’s own immune system could be stimulated to produce more neutrophils on its own by provision of oral vitamin D?

Dr. Michael Holick of Harvard Medical School says virtually every cancer patient is abjectly vitamin D deficient. It’s amazing to realize all the maneuvers cancer doctors make to avoid vitamin therapy.

Cancer researchers have so much they are hiding under the rug. But in a world where information in medical journals is easily accessed electronically and scrutinized, and where dissemination of information via the internet can be rapid and widespread, just how much longer can the cancer industry pull off its ongoing charade? We will see this summer when Dr. Cui begins his eagerly awaited cancer treatment by infusion of white blood cells from cancer-resistant donors to patients with active forms of cancer. In the meantime, step outside and enjoy some midday sun. --- Copyright 2008 Bill Sardi, Knowledge of Health, Inc.

Bill Sardi and Dr. Cannell Discuss Vitamin D and Cancer on CBN

2007-11-14T10:22:00.000-08:00

View the video here
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/269033.aspx

What's the Real Story on Vitamin D?
By Gailon Totheroh

CBNNews.com - When a nasty flu struck California's Atascadero State Hospital, Doctor John Cannell made an interesting discovery.

"I know my patients had been exposed to influenza, but none of them got sick," he said.

Why? One reason could be that 30 of Cannell's patients had been given vitamin D on a regular basis. That got Cannell thinking more and more about the vitamin's benefits and safety.

"A child has never gotten into a vitamin D cabinet and gotten poisoned. That happened hundreds of thousands of times with Tylenol or aspirin or other things," Cannell said.

Medical writer Bill Sardi says that if vitamin D were a drug, its benefits would make it the most popular ever "because we're talking about diabetes and hypertension and bone diseases, osteoporosis, and arteriosclerosis and cancer and autoimmune disease and the list goes on."

Scientists found that list is so long because vitamin D actually regulates cells, systems, and organs throughout the body.

Cannell explained, "It works by turning your genes on and off -- a very basic function. So that's a very important fact about vitamin D that distinguishes it from any other vitamin. It's a steroid hormone, it's in a class by itself."

Vitamin D and Sun Exposure

A major question and area of controversy regarding vitamin D is sun exposure, so health investigators hit the trail looking for answers.

Doctors have observed that where there's less sun, there's more cancer, flu, and even autism. For instance, there are more of these diseases in winter, which has less sunlight. There are also more of these diseases the further you get from the equator, because the further you move away the less sunlight there is.

Even in sunny California very few people get enough sun to make sufficient vitamin D in their skin for the best of health.

"Down in San Diego you can make it year around. But even there in the winter time you have to go right out at solar noon," Cannell said. "There is only a two or three hour window where you're going to make any substantial amounts of vitamin D."

But wouldn't this possibly lead to skin cancer? Most sunscreen companies provide products that block the ultraviolet-B, or UVB, from the sun. Those are the very rays needed to produce vitamin D in the skin.

"Now they admit that the UVA rays that the sunblock lotions allow to get in are the ones causing the cancer. So they let the one that cause skin cancer in -- and they block the one that prevents it," said Bill Sardi of Knowledge of Health, Inc.

Statistics show skin cancer rates and deaths have actually risen since the sunscreen campaigns began thirty years ago.

Cannell recommends keeping your time in the sun moderate - 15 minutes in a bathing suit during summer is plenty. You don't want to age your skin or cause damage from sunburn. But not everyone agrees.

The American Academy of Dermatology Web site finds it "appalling" that "anyone in good conscience could make the claim that intentional sun exposure - for any length of time - is beneficial."

What about Those with Darker Skin?

Then there's the issue of darker skin -- which naturally screens out more of the UVB rays that make vitamin D. Their blood levels of vitamin D are about half that of lighter-skinned people, making a connection with the diseases that shorten their lives.

"Heart disease and hypertension and stroke and cancer are the same diseases that have been associated with vitamin D deficiency," Cannell said.

So it may not be surprising that vitamin D deficiency affects as much as three-quarters of the populace especially as winter takes its toll on vitamin D levels.

That depletion could be remedied and possibly reduce the need for flu shots.

"Vitamin D activates your immune system, causes something to be formed called little peptides, which kill bacteria and viruses without antibiotic resistance, without side effects. We can use it in very young infants and pregnant moms," Sardi said.

It will not only help fight osteoporosis, but strengthen teeth as well.

Sardi said, "Instead of using fluoride to harden our teeth so there's no soft spots where the acids can eat into our teeth and cause dental decay, we can use vitamin D. It's more appropriate, it's more natural."

"If you have diabetes and you take vitamin D and your blood sugar gets low, don't stop the vitamin D. Stop some of your diabetic medications, go talk to your doctor," Cannell said.

And vitamin D also appears to boost athletic performance.

"There's just clear evidence - especially in the German literature - of choice reaction time, balance, muscle strength, endurance -- all improve with vitamin D," Cannell said.

This may explain why senior citizens on vitamin D are less likely to fall and hurt themselves.

Vitamin D and Cancer

As for cancer, Sardi says in a new book that a major reason not to be so fearful about the disease is vitamin D. A key U.S. study in June found it provided a 60 percent reduction in cancers.

"The Canadian Cancer Society immediately told all their citizens to begin supplementing with at least 1,000 units of vitamin D. The American Cancer Society? Mum's the word," Sardi said.

But two weeks ago the National Cancer Institute released a study indicating vitamin D doesn't do much against cancer deaths.

NCI normally prefers the type of study done in June, but Cannell says this new study fits their bias against vitamin D. Even at that, the new study did show the vitamin's effect on the number two cancer killer.

"People with the highest levels had four times less colon cancer than the people with the lowest levels. I think that's pretty important," he said.

So, what is the best way to get the Vitamin D you need? Not from food. Even fortified milk provides so little that it's trivial. Taking supplements is a far more predictable source than sun bathing - and the only source in winter for millions.

Experts suggest the best daily intake is at least 2,000 units for most kids and 4,000 for most adults. Yet the government recommends only 200 to 600 units depending a person's age.

"This whole thing when you think about it is patently absurd. And the government has been recommending this for ten years. They refuse to change, they refuse to even look at the science," Cannell said.

He says he and his wife have taken as much as several hundred thousand units for a few days when fighting off colds or flu. His usual daily dose is 5,000 units -- a dozen times what the government recommends for him. He finds it a religious question.

He said, "Here, the Lord is saying there's a system that makes this much vitamin D this quickly -- thousands of units a day from sun exposure. And here's the government over here saying you only need a couple of hundred units a day. So you can sort of ask yourself, 'Who do you want to believe -- God or the government?'"

Arabic Doctor Stunned By Diagnosis Of Breast Cancer, Touts Mammograms Instead of Sunshine and Vitamin D Pills

2007-10-25T22:54:00.000-07:00

Hooded in traditional Arabic garb, Dr. Sami Al-Amoudi receives worldwide attention for her efforts to make breast cancer a national agenda in Saudi Arabia. She was shocked when she was diagnosed with Stage 3 breast cancer herself. Only 10 days after she discovered she had breast cancer, Dr. Al-Amoudi spoke to a support group and admitted her mistake of not getting a mammogram, a typical occurrence in Saudi Arabia.

Dr. Al-Amoudi’s passion is misplaced. She needs to be teaching Arabic women to take vitamin D pills rather than to expose their breasts to radiation and undergo breast trauma during mammograms. Arabic women have much lower vitamin D levels due to their traditional clothing that shrouds the skin. Asia Pacific Journal Clinical Nutrition 2006; 15(1):81-7]. Even though they live in hot, sunny lands, closer to the equator than most other human populations, their vitamin D levels are very low. Dr. Al-Amoudi fails to heed the latest science, that women who took a vitamin D pill (1100 IU) for 4 years reduced their risk for all types of cancer by 60-77%. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 85, No. 6, 1586-1591, June 2007] Population studies show the lowest rates of cancer in the world are in equatorial zones, which produces high vitamin D levels.

Vitamin D levels below 20 nanograms per milliliter of blood represents a frank deficiency. A study in Lebanon, which is a westernized Arabic country, showed 73% of men and women had vitamin D levels below 12 nanograms. Severe vitamin D deficiency (less than 5 nanograms) was observed amoung 62% of veiled women compared to 42% of unveiled women. J Bone Miner Research 2000 Sep; 15(9):1856-62] - © 2007 Bill Sardi, Knowledge of Health, Inc.

Women Continue To Make Fear-Based Decisions About Breast Cancer

2007-10-23T12:45:00.000-07:00

"Remove both of them" -- double mastectomy. That is the demand made by more and more women who are diagnosed with breast cancer. In a 5-year period, the percentage of women electing to have both breasts surgically removed has risen from just under 2% to almost 5%.

A survey of a small portion of the women diagnosed with breast cancer, published in The Journal of Clinical Oncology, online, if extrapolated to all 200,000 women diagnosed with breast cancer annually, would mean 8000 to 10,000 patients a year elect to undergo this procedure.

“The comment patients make is, ‘I just want to be done with it,’” said one doctor. “They never want to have another mammogram again; they never want to have another biopsy again.”

For the vast majority of our patients, this does not impact the chances of dying of breast cancer, and that’s the key thing here,” said Dr. Julie R. Gralow, the chairwoman of the communications committee of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and an associate professor of medical oncology at the University of Washington and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle.

The question is, why do doctors consent to the patient's wishes when there is no evidence of benefit? These aren't requests from dying women who have no other hope. There is only risk for harm and no benefit in this circumstance. When it comes to cancer, irrational decisions are made. There is no such thing as "got it all" in cancer treatment. Surgery, in fact, increases the chances that tumor cells will escape into the blood circulation and cause tumors elsewhere. A 1-millimeter ball of remaining tumor cells represents 10 million cancer cells. -Copyright 2007 Bill Sardi Knowledge of Health, Inc.

Chemotherapy of no benefit for younger estrogen-receptor positive breast cancer patients

2007-10-12T10:10:00.001-07:00

A young woman is told she has breast cancer. She undergoes lumpectomy and possibly radiation treatment, and then must endure chemotherapy. Her hair falls out. She must be given antibiotics to prevent infections caused by damage to the immune system. Then the worst of insults --- She reads the newspaper and finds out chemotherapy was of no benefit. According to a recent study, chemotherapy for breast cancer patients under age 40 is of no value and should be abandoned. About two-thirds of breast cancers are hormone receptor-positive. Tumor cells have receptors or docking ports for estrogen on their surface. Reference: Breast Cancer Research 9:R70, 2007.

PSA velocity being questioned

2007-10-10T14:37:00.001-07:00

When the PSA (prostate specific antigen) test was dismissed from many scientific quarters, urologists began coaching their patients to examine the rate at which the PSA number accelerated. Patients bought into this idea and began to opt for treatment. Now researchers say the practice of monitoring the velocity of PSA increase is not necessarily valuable as a screening tool and that patients shouldn't elect to undergo biopsies based on this measure alone.As widespread as this practice is, No studies to date have addressed the costs and benefits of using PSA velocity for prostate cancer screening. An increase in PSA among men with very low PSA number to begin with may be meaningless. Source: Etzioni RD, et al. Is Prostate-Specific Antigen Velocity Useful in Early Detection of Prostate Cancer" A Critical Appraisal of the Evidence. Journal National Cancer Institute 2007; 99:1510-1515.

Pathology Lab Mistake Misleads Patient Who Underwent Double Breast Removal

2007-10-04T21:37:00.000-07:00

Darrie Eason, a 35-year-old single mother from Long Island, N.Y., underwent a double mastectomy after she was told she had breast cancer. But after the surgery, she learned the unthinkable -- she never had cancer at all. "I remember the words, 'You don't have breast cancer, you never did,'" Eason said today on ABC NEWS "Good Morning America." Lesson: never rely on one biopsy report.

Androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer encourages spread of tumor cells (metastasis)

2007-10-01T10:20:00.001-07:00

Researchers at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore report that a commonly used treatment for advanced prostate cancer may actually encourage cancer cells to produce a protein that makes them more likely to spread throughout the body. Androgen deprivation. using drugs like Lupron, Zoladex or Casodex, reduces testosterone. Source: Cancer Research, October 1, 2007

Androgen deprivation therapy may also increase the risk of death from heart disease in patients over age 65.

Actress Farrah Fawcett suffers return of cancer; seeks alternative treatments in Germany

2007-09-26T13:38:00.000-07:00

Former "Charlie's Angels" star Farrah Fawcett, seen here in 2006, has suffered a relapse in her battle against anal cancer and plans to pursue alternative treatments in Germany. Diagnosed with cancer in September 2006, the actress had been declared cancer free by her doctors on Feb. 2, 2007, her 60th birthday, after having undergone chemotherapy and radiation.

When she first revealed her condition in 2006, Fawcett said, "I am resolutely strong and I am determined to bite the bullet and fight the fight while going through cutting-edge, state-of-the-art treatment. I should be able to return to my life as it was before at the end of my treatment." Cancerous cells were re-detected in May of 2007. Sadly, Fawcett’s ordeal points to the failed treatments that comprise cancer care today.

Cancer treatments actually increase the number of cancer cells

2007-09-24T08:58:00.000-07:00

After 30 years of failed cancer treatment, experts are finally conceding modern treatment of cancer has its downsides. Experiments conducted at the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences in Maryland show that treatments like chemo and radiation do shrink the size of tumors, but they end up triggering a small population of cancer stem cells that drive the disease and promotes the spread (metastasis) of cancer. Source: Science Daily Sept. 22, 2007

FDA approves drug that allegedly prevents breast cancer, but it promotes blood clots that cause cancer to spread

2007-09-16T10:20:00.000-07:00

A drug that raises the risk of blood clots that then facilitates the spread of cancer is the second drug approved by the Food & Drug Administration to prevent breast cancer. The drug, Evista (Raloxifene), also used to treat osteoporosis, was found to increase the relative risk of dying from a stroke by 49 percent in a study published last year. Nonetheless, the FDA approved Evista as an alternative to tamixofen. But many women refuse to take tamoxifen because of its side effects.

The FDA press release says evidence from three studies show that Evista reduces the risk of invasive breast cancer by 44 to 71 percent, while a fourth larger study showed no advantage over tamoxifen. Why was the data from the largest study separated from the other three reports? (Obvious, all totaled it would have shown no advantage at all).

Since 1998 it has been quoted that Raloxifene (Evista) reduces the incidence of breast cancer by a reported 76%. But that figure is specious. The Canada Drug Guide Project explains Raloxifene this way:
It is claimed that Raloxifene (Evista) reduces incidence of breast cancer by 76% with only a 1% risk of side effects. What it didn’t make clear is the fact that the patients who took the drug in the study went from having a 1% absolute risk of having breast cancer down to a 0.24% absolute risk of having breast cancer over three years (hence, the “76%” reduction). If measured in relative terms, many of the side effects increased much more than 76%--in fact some risks, such as those for blood clots, increased, relatively speaking, by 300%. (See reference here*)

-Copyright Bill Sardi, Knowledge of Health, Inc

Common vitamin “stops cancer in its tracks”

2007-09-11T12:04:00.000-07:00

If cancer patients only knew how to use natural remedies to treat and prevent tumors, but their doctors show little interest. Take, for example, vitamin C. Researchers at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine report that cancer cells require a protein called hypoxia inducing factor-1 (HIF-1) for their survival. Cancer cells grow so fast that circulation cannot supply enough oxygen. Cancerous tissues are characterized as being hypoxic, that is, without oxygen. HIF-1 helps oxygen-deprived tumor cells adapt and create energy from sugars, which keeps them alive. Free radicals (oxidizers) are required to trigger the production of HIF-1. Antioxidants, like vitamin C, remove the free radicals, stop the production of HIF-1 and “stops the tumor in its tracks.” Source: Cancer Cell 12: 230-38, Sept. 2007. To learn more about vitamin C and hypoxia-inducing factor, read You Don’t Have To Be Afraid of Cancer Anymore.

Vitamin D-estroys Cancer

2007-09-06T12:05:00.000-07:00

The book “You Don’t Have To Be Afraid of Cancer Any More” asserts there are available over-the-counter remedies that are more powerful than any chemotherapy drugs in use today. Take, for example, vitamin D. Just 50 micrograms (2000 international units) or just 1/20th of 1 milligram, will cut the risk for colon cancer in half, and 90 micrograms (3600 IU) will cut the risk of breast cancer in half. These are the new calculations released by Cedric F. Garland, cancer researcher at the University of California San Diego. If foods were fortified with vitamin D, Dr. Garland estimates at least 60,000 cases of colorectal cancer could be avoided per year and another 85,000 cases of breast cancer in North America alone. Source: Nutrition Reviews 65; 8 (Suppl):91-95, 2007. Has your oncologist recommended vitamin D to prevent recurrence of cancer?

American Cancer Society Gives Up On Health Promotion Ads In Favor Of Efforts To Seek Insurance Coverage For Cancer Care

2007-08-31T13:48:00.000-07:00

Frustrated that its efforts have not lowered cancer rates, the American Cancer Society has replaced its traditional call for Americans to stop smoking and get screened for colon cancer to an advertising campaign that promotes adequate health insurance coverage for cancer treatment.

Does this signal the cancer care industry has given up on efforts to prevent cancer? While it is said that smoking and poor diets are responsible for a great deal of cancer, the ACS is now embarking on a different road.

A spokesperson for the ACS said that “lack of access will be a bigger cancer killer than tobacco.” Of course, such a statement assumes cancer treatment prolongs life, which has not been shown over the past 30+ years. Cancer rates have dropped in the past decade due to reduction in the number of smokers and women backing away from hormone replacement therapy, not from any advancement in treatment. The American Cancer Society has had little or no impact upon these changes.

A news report says “studies have shown that the rates would fall faster if more patients were diagnosed at early stages. And new research is confirming that insurance status often determines whether a patient is diagnosed early or late.” This is a total falsehood. Earlier diagnosis simply gives the impression cancer patients are living longer. Patients are still dying on the same calendar day. Furthermore, Americans without insurance coverage still have access to cancer care and some studies even show that delays in diagnosis and treatment actually result in prolonged survival compared to early detection and treatment. – Copyright 2007 Bill Sardi

More frequent screening for prostate cancer finds more tumors, but fails to reduce incidence of aggressive life-threatening tumors

2007-08-28T21:19:00.001-07:00

Most men who live into their 70s and 80s and beyond will die with, but not of, prostate cancer. But some men do develop a fast-spreading type of prostate cancer that has a high mortality rate. The idea is for men to undergo bi-annual checkups to monitor for prostate cancer in hopes this will find the aggressive prostate cancer that is life-threatening. But a just-released study, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, shows that men who underwent bi-annual PSA testing had about the same risk for aggressive tumors as men who were not screened as frequently. "Although many of us believe that early detection is saving lives, definitive evidence is lacking," Dr. David Crawford of the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center wrote in an editorial accompanying the study. This makes much of what modern medicine does to monitor prostate cancer nothing more than a "Chinese fire drill."

New Zealanders Wake Up To Reality: There Is No Cure For Cancer

2007-08-24T10:37:00.000-07:00

In recent months two articles in the New York Times underscore the state of chaos in cancer treatment in America. Now New Zealand health officials concede their "cancer battle plan" is "uncoordinated and ad hoc." An article in the August 24, 2007 Dominion Post asks: "What is the point of detecting cancer if we don't have equipment and medicines to treat it?" Despite a government action plan, "very little has, in reality, been achieved," said a documentary report.

The report cited patient frustration with a "a truncated, unproven course of Herceptin while the patient must desperately raise funds to personally fund the extended course." Herceptin is an expensive anti-cancer drug that extends the life of breast cancer patient by a few months at best. Its widespread use would bankrupt most health plans.

A Cancer Society official said it was "intolerable" that nine years after the need was identified, cancer patients in the Wellington region were still waiting for a third radiation machine. The $5 million linear accelerator, which fires a gamma radiation beam to destroy tumors, cannot be installed till the ministry decides who will pay an estimated shortfall of $500,000 in treatment funding. While linear accelerators treat cancer, there is little evidence even one cancer has been cured by such treatment. The New Zealand Cancer Society is demanding more treatment, even if it is ineffective.

Does Sun Phobia Promote Cancer?

2007-08-23T10:35:00.000-07:00

After a young woman developed melanoma skin cancer in Australia following frequent visits to a sun tanning parlor, health officials there have banned use of these UV-ray treatments for children under the age of 16. But will this practice really reduce the rate of skin cancer, and if it does, will it spawn other forms of cancer because of a lack of vitamin D?

Simultaneously, researchers report that 10-15 minutes of sun exposure will prevent hundreds of thousands of cases of breast and colon cancer annually. Cedric F. Garland, cancer prevention specialist at the Moores Cancer Center at the University of California, San Diego estimates 250,000 cases of colorectal cancer and 350,000 cases of breast cancer could be prevented worldwide by increasing intake of vitamin D3, particularly in countries north of the equator. Vitamin D3 is available through diet, supplements and exposure of the skin to sunlight. [Nutrition Reviews August 2007]

At the same time the U.S. Food & Drug Administration has issued a bulletin claiming labeling of topical sunscreens is incomplete because the labels don't indicate the amount of UV-A radiation they filter. Sunscreens are labeled for their ability to block UV-B radiation, the type of sun rays that produce vitamin D in the skin.

The FDA acknowledges that there is no scientific evidence that using sunscreen prevents skin cancer. To learn why cancer rates soared, beginning with the widespread use of sunscreen lotions in 1971, read the book "You Don't Have To Be Afraid Of Cancer Anymore."

Recent ejaculation can elevate PSA and mislead doctors and patients regarding prostate cancer risk

2007-08-14T10:37:00.000-07:00

Doctors in Greece report the case of a 52-year-old Greek man who had no prostate symptoms and who in an annual routine blood test had an elevated serum total PSA of 6 ng/ml (normal range 0-4.0 ng/ml). His personal and family medical history was unremarkable. There was no history of using drugs, or having symptoms of benign prostate hypertrophy, prostate cancer or prostatitis, and he had no recent diagnostic clinical tests of the genitourinary tract. The patient refused digital rectal examination. An abdominal and prostate ultrasound scan showed no evidence of benign prostate hyperplasia or of prostate cancer. Serum total PSA after ten days was 5.2 ng/ml, but the percent free PSA was 27% (normal > 20%). After a month, serum total PSA value dropped to 1.2 ng/ml. In another blood test after 3 months, serum total PSA value rose to 7 ng/ml with a percent free PSA of 40%. The urologist recommended a prostate biopsy. The patient also refused biopsy. After discussing this situation with the patient, his doctors were informed that he had sexual activity and ejaculation in less than 24 hours before the first and before the last serum PSA measurements (being 6 and 7 ng/ml respectively). Ejaculation might have had an effect on serum PSA levels in our patient. All other values of serum total PSA measurements performed at least 4 days after sexual abstinence were < style=""> Greek doctors suggest a 48-hour period of abstinence prior to total PSA measurement. –Hellenic Journal Nuclear Medicine 10: 119, August 2007.

Iron in breast tissue correlated with elevated risk for breast cancer

2007-08-13T00:38:00.000-07:00

Researchers at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine have conducted a very interesting study. They examined the mineral content of breast tissue among women with benign breast disease (dense breast tissue). A mild increased risk for breast cancer was correlated with higher amounts of minerals, zinc, calcium and iron, in breast tissues. When the data from postmenopausal women analyzed separately, the risk for breast cancer nearly doubled for iron in breast tissue compared to premenopausal women. There was no correlation between breast cancer and calcium or zinc in the breast tissue of postmenopausal women. Iron stood out as a strong risk factor. Postmenopausal women lack the control of iron they once had via monthly menstrual iron losses in blood flow. - Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers Prevention 16(8):1682-5, 2007.

Chemotherapy, hormone therapy and tamoxifen induce bone loss

2007-08-10T10:35:00.000-07:00

Women receiving tamoxifen for prevention or treatment of breast cancer will experience accelerated bone loss. This is because the inhibition of estrogen entry into cells results in loss of calcium from bones. Stronger estrogen-blockers called aromatase inhibitors pose an even greater risk, increasing the risk of a bone fracture by another 35-50% compared to tamoxifen. Males with prostate cancer face similar problems. Hormone treatment (androgen deprivation- Lupron) reduces bone mass by 4-5% per year. –Osteoporosis International August 10, 2007 online.

Green leafy vegetables and folic acid (vitamin B9) pills almost cut risk for invasive breast cancer in half

2007-08-09T10:38:00.000-07:00

Millions of American women have undetected breast cancer that will not affect their lives nor their life expectancy. A small percentage of breast tumors will be detected and treated and an even smaller number will become invasive, spread, and threaten life. Of those cases of breast cancer that do become invasive, researchers in Sweden report that folic acid, a common B vitamin found in dark-green leafy vegetables and provided in supplements, slashes the risk for invasive breast cancer by 46% (comparison between high and low folic acid intake from diet and/or supplements). –American Journal Clinical Nutrition 86: 434-43, August 2007.

Sleep determines quality of life among cancer patients

2007-08-08T10:37:00.000-07:00

Cancer patients typically experience insomnia. It is the most common problem among patients with advanced cancer. A survey shows sleep is a strong governor of the assessment of quality of life for cancer patients. –Supportive Care Cancer, August 8, 2007. Editor’s note: Sleep is required for healing. This may explain why melatonin, a sleep hormone, when taken orally, increases survival among cancer patients.

Cancer treatment is potentially fatal

2007-07-06T14:04:00.000-07:00

Standard chemotherapy (combination of 5-FU and irinotecan drugs) can produce such a rapid killing of cancer cells that it may induce acidosis, a life-threatening condition. Called "tumor lysis syndrome," this fatal complication is admission that first-line chemotherapy for cancers, like colon cancer, is potentially fatal within 72 hours of the first course of treatment. - Tumori 90: 514-16, Sept-Oct. 2004.

Tumori. 2004 Sep-Oct;90(5):514-6.
Rapid tumor lysis syndrome in a patient with metastatic colon cancer as a complication of treatment with 5-fluorouracil/leucoverin and irinotecan.
Oztop I, Demirkan B, Yaren A, Tarhan O, Sengul B, Ulukus C, Akin D, Sen M, Yilmaz U, Alakavuklar M.
Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University, School of Medicine, Izmir, Turkey. ilhan.oztop@deu.edu.tr

Tumor lysis syndrome is a potentially fatal complication of anti-cancer therapy that is usually seen in patients with bulky, rapidly proliferating, treatment-sensitive tumors such as hematological malignancies, but it rarely occurs in a variety of solid tumors such as colorectal carcinoma. Combination chemotherapy with infusional 5-fluorouracil/leucoverin and irinotecan has been recently accepted as the first treatment option for metastatic colorectal cancer. We present a case of tumor lysis syndrome in a patient with metastatic colon carcinoma that occurred 72 hrs after the initial course of a combination chemotherapy with irinotecan and 5-fluorouracil/leucoverin. Despite the immediate treatment with aggressive hydration by a sodium bicarbonate infusion, followed by forced diuresis and uricolytic therapy, he died of a sudden cardiac arrest complicated by acute renal failure. Our case indicates that administration of 5-fluorouracil/leucoverin and irinotecan for bulky tumors of colorectal origin with a rapid doubling time may induce an acute tumor lysis syndrome, which necessitates frequent laboratory monitoring and a close follow-up of the patient as well as prompt initiation of appropriate therapeutic measures.

Resveratrol + Beta Glucan synergistically elevate immune system

2007-06-15T10:36:00.000-07:00

White blood cells called phagocytes literally digest tumor cells. Chemo and radiation therapy impair the immune system. The combination of resveratrol, a red wine molecule, with beta glucan, often obtained from the cell wall of Baker’s yeast, stimulate the ability of phagocytes to digest cancer cells in a manner that is greater than either substance used alone. –Biomedical Pap Med Fac University Palacky Olomouc Czech Republic 151: 41-46, 2007.

Erythropoietin is overused in cancer treatment

2007-05-11T14:03:00.000-07:00

A panel of experts advising the Food and Drug Administration gave strong signals yesterday that it thinks the blockbuster anemia drug called erythropoietin is overused in cancer treatment and may, in fact, be shortening the lives of some patients who take it. What troubled the 17-member advisory committee most was data from five studies -- of breast, lung, lymphoid, and throat cancers -- suggesting that erythropoietin caused "tumor promotion" and shorter survival in patients randomly assigned to get it rather than a placebo. [Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, May 11, 2007; Page A08]