All posts by Steve

One Last Burzynski Post

I”m going to post one last article about Burzynski in response to a comment I got and responded to for another Burzynski post.

I want to make it clear that I have NO affiliation with Dr Burzynski, and reason to be angry about not being able to get treatment for my wife at his clinc.

The conversation went like this:

Bottom line from Burzynski critics: the guy has yet to demonstrate that his drugs work. Regardless of FDA conspiracies and the like, no one knows if the drugs he’s selling actually work. The little data he HAS published were obtained using some very questionable (dishonest?) methods. Conspiracy or not, antineoplastons have not been proven to work in any trial. At $20k-30k per month, I feel his patients are owed evidence of efficacy but Burzynski seems to have perfected the art of convincing his patients that they are owed nothing. I wish you the best, and I hope that whatever you’re doing now is working. However, I also hope that, if you do not improve with the Burzynski “therapies”, that you discontinue them quickly and, even if they do work, share your experiences with your readers. If Burzynski is a fraud, he is the worst kind – preying on the desperation of cancer patients. If he is not, then why has he been so reticent to publish his incredible results?

 

Submitted on 2011/09/17 at 11:31 pm | In reply to Matt.

Matt,

Thank you for your positive wishes and feedback.

I am by nature a very skeptical pharmacist… and before I would post anything on this site you have to know that I have investigated it extensively.

So, let me be quite clear on this topic.

I am not able to get my wife treatment with Dr Burzynski’s antineoplastons – or other medications related to them – because I can’t afford it.

This really pisses me off.

And, I must say that their business practices are probably best described as sketchy.

But I am quite certain Dr Burzynski’s antineoplastons work – at least for some significant number of cancers, and that is something I do not believe I can say for conventional therapies if not augmented by non-traditional concepts.

I can’t help thinking of an article I read that was published by a major Cancer Society.

NOBODY addressed the data that had been presented.

Instead, ALL the reviewers hid behind the fact that they didn’t like the way Dr Burzynski structured his trials and quantified his data.

It was – in my opinion – quite a smear piece with NO redeeming value.

One must ask oneself why this was the case.

I will not tell you why I think it was dealt with in this manner.

I will only say – as a person with extensive engineering, statistical analysis, and process control experience – that the concept of evidence based medicine is one that is situationally invoked to serve the strangest of purposes.

YOU – my readers – should be pissed too!

 

I believe the exchange typifies the difference in perspective between those who are willing to critically analyze and search out data and those who support the mainstream approach.

You can read what the U.S. Government’s task force wrote about Dr Burzynski here:CongressReport

You can also read the later comments of a consultant to that project here:http://www.commonweal.org/pubs/choices-healing.html Chapter 21

You’ll have to study the data and decide for yourself what you’re going to believe.

I’ve also provided a copy of the abstract and links to a well done study that I think speaks volumes about the effectiveness of chemotherapy here:

The link to PubMed’s abstract –

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15630849

A copy of the abstract –
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2004 Dec;16(8):549-60.

The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies.

Source

Department of Radiation Oncology, Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia. gmorgan1@bigpond.net.au

Abstract

AIMS:

The debate on the funding and availability of cytotoxic drugs raises questions about the contribution of curative or adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to survival in adult cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

We undertook a literature search for randomised clinical trials reporting a 5-year survival benefit attributable solely to cytotoxic chemotherapy in adult malignancies. The total number of newly diagnosed cancer patients for 22 major adult malignancies was determined from cancer registry data in Australia and from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results data in the USA for 1998. For each malignancy, the absolute number to benefit was the product of (a) the total number of persons with that malignancy; (b) the proportion or subgroup(s) of that malignancy showing a benefit; and (c) the percentage increase in 5-year survival due solely to cytotoxic chemotherapy. The overall contribution was the sum total of the absolute numbers showing a 5-year survival benefit expressed as a percentage of the total number for the 22 malignancies.

RESULTS:

The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA.

CONCLUSION:

As the 5-year relative survival rate for cancer in Australia is now over 60%, it is clear that cytotoxic chemotherapy only makes a minor contribution to cancer survival. To justify the continued funding and availability of drugs used in cytotoxic chemotherapy, a rigorous evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and impact on quality of life is urgently required.

A link to a copy of a pdf of the article –

http://www.burtongoldberg.com/home/burtongoldberg/contribution-of-chemotherapy-to-five-year-survival-rate-morgan.pdf

 

 

I Visited Burzynski’s Clinic Last Week – And I Do NOT Believe He Is A Quack!

My wife and I drove a total of 36+ hours to and from Houston over a 3 day period the week after July 4th to have her case reviewed by the doctors at Dr. Burzynski’s clinic.

Additionally, I had to endure – as I’m sure you might have to if you decide to go there – the strident criticisms of family members who are convinced that Dr. Burzynski’s treatments are a scam. Their reasons for believing this to be the case? Their extensive and highly technical review of google search results for the topic ‘Burzynski Scam’, or something like that. I’m sure their intentions are good, but the only way I know of to find out whether something is credible or not is to go see it yourself.

Anyway, we did visit the clinic. We did pay the money you have to pay to see the docs. We did see the docs. We did NOT get to start treatments – but not because I am not convinced that Dr. Burzynski’s Antineoplaston therapies don’t work. I simply couldn’t afford it at the time. Although they’ll submit your expenses to the insurance company, they’re pretty much a pay as you go enterprise – and you will need a lot of cash to get through their protocol.

So, I’m sure you’re asking yourself… what did you see and what do you think about what you saw.

First… I want to go on record saying that I firmly believe that Dr. Burzynski’s treatments work for a significant number of the patients who get treated. I say this based on a gestalt of impressions formed while going through the process of seeing the docs, listening to people talk to each other in the waiting room and in the lobby, the discussion we had with Dr. Burzynski, and the results of my review of numerous journal articles and patents authored by Dr. Burzynski and members of his team.

And the story I overheard from a patient who has been being treated for around a year for extensively metastasized prostate cancer – and who has only one ‘small’ lesion left – is a hard thing to ignore. He was so excited, and definately a patient. He got weighed just before my wife did.

We met with Dr. Burzynski’s son (an extremely personable physician) and an oncologist (Dr Yi) whom I was quite impressed with. He knew my wife’s case in great detail. After we talked, they left and discussed the case with Dr Burzynski. Then they came back into the room to talk about options and opinions. During this discussion they asked to have previous biopsy samples sent to a university for genomic mapping. They also wanted to get a PET scan done and planned to start her on their oral medication to see if it worked for her. (Note: you can’t receive the IV formulations unless the FDA approves your entry into one of Dr. Burzynski’s Clinical Trials.)

OK, yes… money is a central theme going in and coming out of the session with the docs. The office is kind of a money collection machine. But, I’m pragmatic about that. They don’t let you see a doc or get tests at your neighborhood hospital either unless you can produce what are essentially guaranteed funds.

I left frustrated, discouraged and angry that the treatments are not mainstream and easily covered by insurance – but resolved to work on the problem of getting my wife antineoplaston therapy.

The facility was nice. The people were nice and appeared to be competent. The equipment that the blog that my son showed me had complained about was equivalent to the equipment that they use at the hospital I work at. Not fancy, but definately adequate and definately not obsolete.

And then there was Dr. Burzynski…. He has obviously seen a lot of cancer patients come through his doors. It seems to me that he has seen many pass away, and has seen many live. His ice blue eyes never looked away or hid from query. He had the demeanor of a man who believes in what he is doing and has logged significant successes. I believe he is the real deal.

Hope this helps. I’m going to keep trying to figure out a way to pay for his treatments.

Again, as always, you know I’m nuts. Do your research… What I have conveyed above is my story and my impressions. But, after I got home I sent his corporate office an e-mail offering to work for them in Houston (and I HATE humidity) if they needed a pharmacist and covered treatments for employee’s family members.

Emanuel Revici’s Book – ‘Research in Physiopathology As Basis of Guided Chemotherapy – With Special Application To Cancer’

This book was written by Dr Revici to explain his theories and to show results of his cancer treatments. It’s difficult to find a copy, although there is an online copy available that you can read.

You can read the online version here:

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?seq=5&id=mdp.39015003770982&page=root&view=image&size=100&orient=0

Or, you can read and download the book by clicking the file links below. These files are pdfs of the book organized by chapter.

If I were you I’d definately save copies of these files so that you will always have access to them.

Dr Revici was quite controversial! Many people from a broad spectrum of backgrounds thought he was a genius. Influential elements of the mainstream medical community portrayed him as a quack and worked very hard to destroy him.

I present this info without comment beyond the fact that I’m trying to understand his work, and the pdf files were manually generated so that I could more easily access and read them.

Warning, it’s a very big book.

EmanuelReviciPart1, ERChapter1, ERChapter2, ERChapter3, ERChapter4, ERChapter5, ERChapter6, ERChapter7, ERChapter8, ERChapter9, ERChapter10, ERChapter11, ERChapter12, ERChapter13, ERChapter14, ERChapter15, ERChapter16, Notes1, Notes2, Notes3, Notes4, ReviciErrata

Again, I’m crazy. But I find Dr Revici’s story and theories quite compelling and interesting.

Is Acetaminophen Causing Our Autism Epidemic?

I read an interesting journal article some time ago, and I thought you might be interested in the theories it presents.

The article was titled ‘Did Acetaminophen Provoke The Autism Epidemic?’, and it was written by Peter Good. This article was published in Volume 14, November 4, 2009 of the Alternative Medicine Review, and you can read a copy of it at this web link. 

http://www.thorne.com/altmedrev/.fulltext/14/4/364.pdf

I don’t know much about Peter Good, but the article appears to be a coherent presentation of data presented by other researchers in some interesting study reports, and it left me pondering the implications and asking myself ‘What if they’re right?’

I think you’ll think the same way after reading it.

To summarize the author’s points –

– The increase in autism that we’re seeing seems to correlate with the timing of the generation of the belief that aspirin causes Reye’s Syndrome and a dramatic increase in acetaminophen use in infants and children.

– It further seems that the occurence of autism has shifted to what would best match a model that has non-hereditary damage occuring after childbirth.

– It has been observed that acetaminophen interferes with the processing of several toxins, and that autistic children appear to have impaired abilities relatve to processing and eliminating these same toxins.

– The link of aspirin to Reye’s Syndrome may not be as strong as currently believed.

I don’t know what the truth is, but to be on the safe side I’m recommending something other than acetaminophen from now on when people ask what I’d use for an infant or child.

Remember, I’m crazy… and just a pharmacist. Check with your Docs and Primary Care Providers for their recommendations. I’m pretty sure they’re not in love with acetaminophen, either.

Are Many Ovarian Cancers (Especially Post-Menopausal) Driven By Male Hormones???

In previous posts we’ve talked about the belief that many ‘female’ cancers are driven by estrogen and its action on estrogen receptors – and we’ve discussed possible treatment options and theories about how different medicines can be used to reduce this effect.

http://thatcrazypharmacist.com/?p=388

http://thatcrazypharmacist.com/?p=329

I still believe that the points made in those previous posts are valid and important information.

But, I think the information that will be in this post is at least as important.

You see, there’s an ovarian cancer patient who’s the friend of a friend… and her tumors have come back and are extemely aggressive. My friend asked my opinion relative to options they might try in combination with what her oncologist had tried to slow down the tumors’ growth.

So, we talked about some options – and they eventually implemented some of the ideas I’ve posted on this website – and there was no effect.

None, Zip, Nada… – and this bears very heavily on my mind because that woman is now in chemotherapy again, and I am quite concerned about her well being – and feel a need to understand what’s going on in case my family member’s tumors come back in a similar way.

So, I started digging again to see if I could figure out why her tumors seemed to be driven by something despite the fact that this patient was on an aromatase inhibitor.

And – in the middle of the night – I read this passage in a book written by Dr Aurel Lupulsecu:

‘Ovarian cancer is estrogen dependent in premenopausal women and becomes more androgen dependent in post menopausal women.’ (Hormones and vitamins in Cancer Treatment, 1990, RC271.H55L87, Page 33)

Although I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, this statement caused me to pause and think about its implications for a very long time.

As far as I can tell, the author is as informed as anyone in this area, having dedicated his career to studying these effects.

So I then got busy checking to see if the literature supported Dr Lupulescu’s claim.

The bottom line of that search for confirmation is that it appears Dr Lupulescu is probably correct.

Representative journal articles include ‘Expression of human estrogen receptor-alpha and -beta, progesterone receptor, and androgen receptor mRNA in normal and malignant ovarian epithelial cells’, Kin-Mang Lau, Samuel C. Mok, and Shuk-Mei Ho. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol 96, May 1999, pp. 5722-5727. (http://www.pnas.org/content/96/10/5722.full.pdf+html) and ‘Androgen Receptors in Ovarian Tumors: Correlation with Oestrogen and Progesterone Receptors in an Immunohistochemicaland Semiquantitative Image Analysis Study’, M.R. Cardillo, E. Petrangeli, N. Aliotta, L. Salvatori, L. Ravenna, C. Chang, and G. Castagna. J. Exp Clin. Cancer Res. 17, 2, 1998: pp 231-237. (https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/george-whipple-lab/documents/chang-papers/CV113.pdf) There are many more… but some are hard to get copies of, and these two mirror the info presented elsewhere pretty well.

Anyway, based on the articles and works written by Dr Lupulescu and others I’ve read I’ve formulated the following theories that might be helpful in the case of ovarian cancers that don’t appear to respond to the use of aromatase inhibitors –

1. To reduce the levels of androgen hormones that might be driving the tumors’ growth I would try adding finasteride to the woman’s regimen at a dose of 5-10mg per day.

2. If adding finasteride to the regimen doesn’t work I’d add a high dose birth control pill that contains both estrogen and progesterone components.

3. If complete reduction of testosterone levels is desired I’d add ketoconazole to the patient’s regimen.

Your physician will understand what I’m talking about…

The point is that post-menopausal ovarian tumors may need to have their androgen sources opposed, reduced or eliminated if you are going to slow down their growth.

I have no idea whether or not these options might help my friend’s friend. She has already been through an extremely aggressive chemotherapy regimen.. and her tumors came back. – quickly and aggressively. Maybe the chemo created a monster that can’t be killed. I hope not.

Remember, I’m a pharmacist – not a physician – and what I have written above is theoretical, not proven. I’m sure somewhere in the universe a physician or researcher has tried what I’ve proposed. I just haven’t been able to find and read the reports yet.

Anyway, I’m providing information that I think might be useful for you and your physician to consider if the list of options is getting pretty small.

And – as always – don’t change your medication regimens without checking things out with your physician.

But, don’t forget that your physician is only human and it never hurts to try to engage them to think about ideas that the drug companies haven’t dropped on their desks.

DCA (Dichloroacetate) – Theories About How It Works To Treat Cancer From The Michelakis Team

We’ve talked about the use of dichloroacetate (DCA) for the treatment of various cancers before.

http://thatcrazypharmacist.com/?p=115

In summary, the data that is available from lab experiments, a small clinical trial conducted by a team from the University of  Alberta, and other small trials strongly indicates that DCA can cause dramatically positive effects when used to treat some cancers.

You can find the results of the clinical trial and information about how the dichloroacetate was dosed in this article – http://dca-information.pbworks.com/f/Metabolic%20Modulation%20of%20Glioblastoma%20with%20Dichloroacetate.pdf.

Anyway, I’ve been reading a Springer Science book titled ‘Mitochondria and Cancer’ over the past week or so, and I thought the information contained in one of the chapters would be of interest to you because it quite clearly defines how the Michelakis team thinks DCA works to cut down cancer loads and progression.

The chapter is titled Reversing the Warburg Effect: Metabolic Modulation as a Novel Cancer Therapy, and it is written by Gopinath Sutendra and Evangelos D. Michelakis.

Unfortunately, I cannot provide you with a link to this book – and it is actually quite expensive. However, you might be able to track down a copy of it at a university library somewhere, or the reference librarian at a library near you might be able to get you a pdf copy of this particular chapter.

But, to make the best of the situation I will summarize what the chapter says.

First, it is important to understand that the role inhibition of mitochondrial function plays in the survival of many cancers is known by all.

But, there continues to be a great debate over whether it’s the bottom line cause of cancer progression or the result of the conditions generated by the cancer itself.

In this chapter the authors present the proposal that the mitochondrias’ function has been disabled as the result of an environment that prevented proper function (e.g. a lack of oxygen), and that – for some reason – once the cells’ metabolism has been altered to compensate for the mitochondria’s inactivation, the cells resist turning them back on once the unfavorable conditions have been remedied.

Having the mitochondria disabled causes the membrane surrounding the mitochondria to become more negatively charged than they normally would be, and this prevents the exit of several substances from the mitochondria that are necessary for the induction of apoptosis (programmed cell death) .

By inactivating an enzyme that blocks the flow of a key substance that is required by the mitochondria, DCA works to reestablish the flow – thus enabling the mitochondria to resume proper function.

Apparently, using DCA to unlock the strangle hold that the cancer cell’s metabolism puts on the mitochondria allows the mitochondrial membrane to return to its normal voltage level – with a subsequent release of the substances that normalize the cell’s functions and signal the cell to progress to apoptosis.

The authors note that this phenomenom does not occur in all cancer types, but does appear to be present in most. A list of the types that may not exhibit it is also listed in the article.

As always, I’m a Pharmacist. Talk to your physician before trying any new medication or supplement… and/or changing your medication regimen.

Dr Burzynski’s Antineoplastons… A Treatment Option Cancer Patients Should Know About

I have struggled with what to say in this post for several weeks.

I strive to provide information that I think people – especially cancer patients and those who love them – should know about… and to avoid posting info that can’t be backed up with cold, hard data.

But, sometimes the topic is extremely controversial…

This is the case for Dr Burzynski and his antineoplaston based cancer treatments.

To say that extremely large sums of money have been spent to try to keep his treatments away from the public would be an understatement.

I will not speculate as to why this has been the case, or detail who it seems has been spending the money and energy to suppress his therapies.

But, if you’re interested keep reading and check out the links I’ve posted within this post.

I will go on record to say that as far as I can tell – and I have checked the info pretty thoroughly because I was reviewing it as an option for a family member  who has cancer – Dr Burzynski’s therapy is real, works for many patients, is solidly based on scientific evidence and should be considered as an option for any cancer patient.

Especially those who have reached the point where the doctors have told them they can do no more – or by those who anticipate that’s where they’re going to end up. It seems to make sense that the sooner the treatments start – and the less damaged the patients are from other treatment efforts – the more likely they are to work.

But, it is expensive… and it is my understanding that most insurance companies won’t pay for it.

I would like to point out, however, that the cost – when scaled to the need to maintain the research and treatment operations that he has built and to fight off the attacks that have been made against him and his therapies – is probably low compared to what would be charged by the traditional pharmaceutical companies.

Anyway, in summary:

While performing research Dr Burzynski noted that specific peptide substances were missing from the urine of many cancer patients. He researched the possibility that replacing those peptides would work as a treatment for cancer patients. It seems that his beliefs were true, and many cancer patients seem to have definately gained serious benefits from undergoing his treatments. This accomplishment is all the more notable when one considers that only the most hopeless cases have been previously allowed access to Dr Burzynski’s treatments. Powerful organizations have repeatedly tried to have his therapies suppressed, but the evidence in support of the effectiveness of these therapies continues to thwart their efforts. It is my understanding that he is the owner of the patents for the use of these ‘antineoplaston’ peptides, and he maintains a research and treatment center in the Houston, Texas area.

You can find out more information about the Burzynski therapies by taking a look at this website http://www.burzynskimovie.com/, reading Thomas Elias’ book titled ‘The Burzynski Breakthrough’, or by viewing the video located at this web address http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/162978-1.

You can also watch a Question and Answer session with Dr Burzynski and others that was held at the Newport Beach Film Festival at this address http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8m1A7ISEFE.

I guarantee that watching these videos will change your world perspective.

You can buy a copy of the Elias book on Amazon, and other places. You can buy a copy of the movie at Amazon.com, or view it as an Amazon Instant Video download at http://www.amazon.com/Burzynski-Movie-Cancer-Serious-Business/dp/B004LKF01O/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1301218912&sr=8-2.

I think you should visit the Burzynski Movie website and check it out a bit, buy a copy of Elias’ book and read it, watch the video from the CSPAN site, AND watch the full movie – either by buying it or downloading it onto your computer from Amazon.com.

And don’t forget to watch the Newport Beach Film Festival interview.

You should also take a look at Dr Burzynski’s websites –  http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/ and http://www.burzynskiresearch.com/ – and contact them asking for the infomation they provide to potential patients relative to the treatments’ availability and trial results.

Then – after gathering as much info as you can – you should decide for yourself whether you believe this is a therapy that might work for you or your loved one.

I can’t afford it for my family member, at least not at this time. But, it is on my list of options.

You will have to decide for yourself.

As always, I have no affiliation with Dr Burzynski (or any other persons affiliated with the movie or the book) – and make no money if you go there or buy, read or view any of the materials you can get to using the links above.

The information I’ve provided is for your consideration, not a recommendation of pursuit of any specific therapeutic path.

Again, I’m a Pharmacist – NOT a physician. I am only providing this information to ensure you have access to new ideas that you can talk over with your physician. Only you and your physician can determine if this is a path you should follow.

Coffee Enemas…. Crazy? Maybe Not.

As we study and learn, it is often humbling to have to admit that we have discarded an idea that we were certain could not be true – only to later come to believe that it might be possible.

This is the case for the possibility that coffee enemas might be useful in cancer treatment regimens.

I know… you’re now convinced that I’ve lost all my marbles.

I assure you, I have not.

A year and a half ago a friend gave me a book that was written by a woman who had achieved breast cancer remission, and who believed with all her heart and soul that coffee enemas were important to her therapy.

I thanked her with a smile, briefly thumbed through its pages, and took it home.

When my wife asked me what I thought of it I told her I thought it was one of the craziest things I’d heard in a long time – a crazy alternative medicine waste of time and energy that had no chance of helping cancer patients.

I was, you see, a very well ‘trained’ pharmacist who quickly rejected ideas that were not in synchronization with the medical status quo.

Anyway, she read the book – and I didn’t read any more than I already had.

But I’ve become a more thoughtful person as time has passed and as I’ve studied the writings of numerous persons who have been famous for non-traditional, non-allopathic or alternative medicine cancer treatments.

So, let’s assume for a minute that we are trying to deliver a medicine instead of an anti-cancer regimen targeted at irritating the gastrointestinal tract or simply delivering caffeine to stimulate bile duct opening or liver immune response.

Perhaps it’s unfair to exclude caffeine from the classification of a medication. So, we’ll include it.

Anyway, let’s also assume that this medication that we’re going to try to deliver is damaged by the acidity that it would encounter as it passed through the stomach – or that it gets destroyed by the liver when it’s absorbed from the intestines and moved through the liver to ultimately reach circulation in the blood system.

If you were to ask a pharmacist how to deliver this medication he would tell you you could deliver it rectally in an enema. In fact, if you weren’t certain what chemical you were trying to deliver – and therefore had to deliver large volumes of the solution to ensure the drug got to the patient’s system in large enough quantites – she/he would undoubtedly tell you that the rectal route would be the preferred route.

The intestines present a huge surface area through which medications can be absorbed.

Add irritation that causes the intestinal tissues to be inflammed and you will often achieve absorbtion of medicinal agents that aren’t normally absorbed very well.

This gets us around the stomach acid problem, but what about liver matabolism issues.

Well, there is only one GI tract location where you can deliver medications without their being immediately metabolized by the liver. That spot is where we place rectal suppositories.

So, I’m going on record as believing that it is possible that coffee enemas may be delivering substances that are found in coffee beans to a cancer patient’s systemic circulation in the most efficient manner. This is not what the folk who recommend them usually claim, but it is my belief.

Or, it could be that the various explanations proposed by Dr Max Gerson and others are correct.

Regardless, the bottom line remains the same. You simply cannot discount the possibility that Coffee Enemas may have positive effects in cancer patients’ treatment regimens.

I know, this is an absolutely crazy statement… but I believe it most accurately reflects the facts as they are known at this time.

Now, don’t go out there and start blindly pumping your intestines full of coffee! Seriously, you could hurt yourself or a loved one.

I propose you should check out the advice of the experts in this area.

I’d take a look at the book titled ‘The Gerson Therapy: The Proven Nutritional Program for Cancer and Other Illnesses’ and the series of videos that start with this one http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-8384134159042346609  to get info relative to how the enemas are supposed to be given to keep the patient safe.

I have no connection with the Gerson program. I make no money if you buy the book or look at the video. I’ve provided this information because I believe it might be useful for you or a loved one.

Remember, talk to your physician before you try coffee enemas or any other ‘medication’ regimen. I’m a Pharmacist – not a Physician, and obviously looney as can be. I’m just telling you what I’ve come to believe, not recommending the use of coffee enemas… But, I will point out that this therapy seems to be integrated into an awful lot of the non-traditional protocols that people swear saved their lives….

Results of Screening of Medicinal Herbs for Tumoricidal Properties

Every once in awhile I run across a journal article that I end up reading and re-reading over and over again.

This is one of those articles –

In Vitro Screening for the Tumoricidal Properties of International Medicinal Herbs. Elizabeth A. Mazzio and Karam F. A. Soliman. Phytother Res. 2009 March ; 385-398. doi:10.1002/ptr.2636.

and you can get a free copy of it at this web address:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2650746/pdf/nihms-86121.pdf

The study appears to have been done very well, and their article provides ranking and tumoricidal concentration data for a vast number of herbal substances that have been reported to be useful for the treatment of cancers.

Although the rankings provide numerous surprises, the convergence of their data with the ingredients of past healer’s elixers is quite interesting….. and, yes… a Boswellia extract is included in their analysis and scored as one of the most potent tumoricidal agents.

As always, don’t run off and start chewing on grass based on what this report says… Talk to your physician, take this report to him or her and discuss the results with her/him. Recruit his/her assistance to help you or help you find someone who is knowledgeable enough to consult with you regarding your particular circumstances and physiological conditions.

I’m a Pharmacist. Pharmacists Pharmacist. Physicians Physician. As it should be.