by Jack Campitelli | March 9th, 2011
By Jack Campitelli, J.D.
Keywords: cancer metastasis breast prostate needle biopsy alternative treatments baking soda Simoncini cancertutor.com ayurvedic homeopathic shaman alkalinity candida fungus natural vitamin C B-17
I’m going to say on the onset that I have precious little good to say about Western medicine, also called allopathic medicine — when it comes to keeping us well. But . . . I strongly believe in Western medicine for immediate (as in hours) life-threatening illness, trauma emergencies, and specialized surgery. There is no better medicine for these instances. So, even if you don’t agree with me that allopathic medicine has its place in our survival kit, be carefully not to throw out the baby with the bath water. Western medicine has a LOT to do with lifesaving but, in my opinion, too little to do with health.
Thus I don’t believe that allopathic medicine’s ability to help chronic (long term) illness, or cure non-immediate life-threatening diseases is better when compared to other medical traditions that seem to offer long-term wellness protocols that work. And this includes cancer.
There are many types of healing medicine. Allopathic (the “white coats” as I call them); ayurvedic (Indian/Hindu); Chinese; shaman (indigenous peoples), as well as naturopaths, chiropractors, homeopaths, osteopaths and others. Every one of these systems has basic “tenants” which define the boundaries of its thinking, its orthodoxy, its “box,” so to speak. In my opinion, no one brand of medicine has a lock on the truth. A really good physician should be able to move between each discipline and take the best to treat a particular disease or to keep a patient on a healthful path.
Rule: As with all things in life, some persons with medical degrees and licenses are hacks. They do their job and they get their money. They do that job within the bounds of their profession and licensure. Perhaps once full of dreams, they have sold out. They have elected to operate clearly inside the rigid bounds of their license. Who can blame them? Not me. The “doctor business” is so regulated by litigation, malpractice insurance, and health insurance, that really decent doctors have “given up” and are just awaiting their retirement. They urge their own children to explore other professions. They are tired of not being able to practice medicine. There was a time when a physician, once licensed, had to go a good ways out of the box to reap censure from his profession. He was presumed to be his own master when it came to his practice. Alas, now every bureaucrat wants a piece of every doctor’s practice. Idiots controlling persons of talent honed by grueling training.
But there remain other physicians, with or without degrees or licenses, that have dedicated their very lives to curing illness and they worship no sacred cows as to what treatments or protocols they use; they do not limit themselves to one orthodoxy. Their only God is “what cures” and they are constantly seeking out “what cures”. Some of these physicians practice their art in regular looking sterile treatment rooms. Others in village huts. Others in their homes or even in secret.
There is no consensus in the world about what “health” is. There is no consensus about how our human organism actually works. Some medical systems have “science,” other have “beliefs,” others have theories, others have tradition, others metaphysics. There is overlap in places. But there is no “universal” treatment for a particular disease that is accepted “everywhere.” A shaman in Ecuador is going to look at you as if you’re crazy if you start talking “antibiotics” as he’s mashing up some leaves to place on a wound. There is no common language. The shaman’s view of how the body works is not the same as your local doctor’s. Amazingly difficult as it is for Western doctors to believe, shaman healers actually successfully help many people return to health or help them never to leave a naturally healthy state of being.
Shaman purport to be able to cure leukemia while you’re standing there. True? I have no idea. If the leukemia actually disappears, can you understand that Western doctors have no reference place for this treatment except to discredit it? But I know Novarits pharmaceutical company, or its cohorts, has been to, and remains in, the Amazon looking for curative plants or treatment protocols. Are they going to package them up and sell them for five cents, like the shamans do? No. They are going to create a close molecular cousin that is patentable, spend a half a billion dollars getting FDA approval, and then offer it as the next miracle cure. You see, it’s easy to spend a half billion dollars testing if you actually know the outcome already, right? And they got the outcome from watching a shaman heal people for free. This is not my novelist imagination. This is how it really happens. I’ve actually had talks with Novartis chemists who told me the story. Does it make Novartis evil? Probably not. But it does give one pause to examine what we think of as superior medicine. And it does make one want to sort of find the “magic leaves” and treat oneself or even one’s family, doesn’t it?
My own knowledge and belief system says that healing is probably both more simple and more complicated than we think. In my own belief system, to make things even more complicated, even to me, I also believe that some people are true “healers” in the sense that their nearby intentional energy alone can change my energy and re-align my health. Some physicians get amazing results from “placebos” and often these doctors know that something else is happening but they know that if they breathe a word of it they lose their license – let alone compensation from an insurance company. Along these lines I think that there is bright future for electro-medicine, but keep it to yourself for now. But when you find a doctor who seems to really get you well, notice if sometime during your examination or conference he does not touch you in some manner. Some “white coat” doctors are true healers. If they know it, they prudently keep it to themselves. I have know other “lesser licensed physicians” who seemed to be able to do amazing things with both electro-medicine as well as “intentionality” and laying on of hands.
The insertion of insurance companies into medicine has fouled an already fouled mess. I have had more than one doctor look at me, shaking his head, as he says if he can’t find a box to check on the form, he can’t get paid. And, as most of you know, traditional insurance only compensates Western doctors and only a few other healing arts, if any.
A WORD ABOUT PRAYER
First, my bias. I’m not really a let’s-hold-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya kind of fellow. I consider it a “failing” on my part, so I’m not proud to be that way. As of result of this failing, I do not believe in an “interventionist” God. However, I do believe that the universe works according some natural laws (as well as random events/chaos theory) and that its complexity and intricacy, indicates some kind of God-force at work. I find evidence of God in the propelling force of evolution. Whereas others feel more inclined to like miracles and an interventionist God. In any event, I believe that “we” can intentionalize our energy to affect outcomes. That sort of sounds like prayer. Instead, I would explain it as a form of energy and physics. But a rose is a rose is a rose. Therefore, I believe that belief and intentionality is important in all undertakings, let alone in maintaining or regaining health.
There is absolutely no doubt in serious science that energy is always flowing between objects. Whether objects or people, things near each other share common fields of energy. Science says there is no doubt about this. Thus I can accept that some people have “force fields” that can affect my force field for good or bad and that it is necessary for me to keep up my own “force field” to protect myself or to “lower my shields” to allow someone to intervene to help me. Thus I can accept electro-medicine: that certain electro-magnetic frequencies are curative or harmful.
The problem I have with prayer, or intentional laying on of hands, is that to some extent it depends on the mojo of the people involved. Sometimes mojo is powerful and sometimes it is weak though nonetheless there. Cancer is usually a fast moving disease process or else a grindingly relentless one that can seemingly fend off anything. A good doctor of oriental medicine will usually recommend that a cancer patient “go Western.” Why? Because they don’t believe in the power of their medicine? No. It is because Western medicine is stronger and full of magic bullets – even if it doesn’t lead to balanced health. It does not gently nudge the patient back to health. Instead it shoots an arrow directly into the evil invader. In oriental medicine, things happen in the fullness of time. In cancer patients, there is no time.
I put prayer into this category. Not necessarily ineffective, but perhaps, like Chinese medicine, not strong enough fast enough. My experience with laying on of hands is that someone is often in Stage III or IV before prayer intervention starts. Meaning time is limited. However, if this if part of your belief system, then you bloody well should do it! Intentionality, mind over matter, is a big deal in any curative process. Doctors often cure simple because people believe in their mojo. Good doctors know this and use it and don’t abuse it.
Part of the reason for my urging you to start learning about alternative treatments before you need the big-dog cures, is so you believe in your own mojo and, just as important, others around you believe in it, too. But in the same breath that I can say “mojo” can play a part in a cure, so can the right treatment protocol. And the right treatment protocol might act fast enough to save you.
Because I don’t believe in an “interventionist God” I believe that the “universe” is not much inclined to care whether I, personally, live or die. However, the same universe has provided me with a brain and access to tools and some small power over live or death – if I have gone to the trouble of learning which magic leaves will cure me, which antibiotic, or which Rife frequencies. I do not find any of these beliefs at odds with prayer, and frankly, I find it a form of it.
Everything I’ve just written is one man’s opinion. I have no idea if it’s the truth. It’s just my truth for the moment.
There is an old proverb perhaps appropriate here: Do everything you can as if it all depended on you, and pray like it all depended on God.
Can’t go wrong with that advice.
PHYSICIAN HEAL THYSELF
In the end, there is only one person responsible for you health. It is not the government, pharmaceutical companies, hospitals or doctors. It’s you and only you. If you want to rely on others, that is fine. It’s your right. It is really hard to do research on your OWN cancer or your own heart disease or your own kidney failure. It is really scary to say “No” to a traditional treatment plan and strike out on your own.
In fact, it’s one of those things that you rarely can you do “at the last minute”. If a diagnosis says you have pancreatic cancer, it is a death sentence. Doctors will offer experimental treatments. Few of them work except in the statistical “luck” category.
But there are alternative treatments that claim to work.
All of us want to surrender our selves to a higher, wiser authority – even if we know that authority doesn’t have a real “cure”. I have been in the offices when their patients abandoned reason and gave their fate over to the doctor whom I knew had no real curative protocol. I’ve watched it happen to my own family. The “white coats” have tremendous power that we give them. We are programmed from childhood to run to the “white coats” as soon as trouble strikes. But the “white coats” do not know everything. They know a long way from everything.
Physicians (no matter whose flavor) have one thing that makes them valuable: they have seen a lot more patients than you and I have. They have a much better idea of how a disease typically “presents” and how it progresses. If you’ve watched the sleuthing work on “Dr. House” you know how difficult “differentials” are to work up — and your case is not going to get a really smart “team” assigned to it. Realize, that in 99.9% of cases like “Dr. House” gets, the patient dies. Cause never to be discovered.
Taking responsibility for your health is something you rarely have courage to do unless you have a made a tradition of believing in alterative treatments that you have performed on yourself and others to the point you believe that you KNOW for a certainty that YOU can influence the state of your health. I don’t believe that you can form this kind of “knowing belief” in a time a crisis unless you have steeled yourself and educated yourself to believe in yourself for a decade.
If you want to take responsibility for what happens to you then you need to learn how to do it and learning requires research and experimenting and self-treatment and re-treatment until you get it right.
What does it mean to take control of your own health – to take “ownership” of your health? Well, it means going against most of what your cultural instincts are – resisting the urge to turn to experts to “cure” you in times of trouble. Experts ARE important and I am not suggesting that you don’t use them. But the key word is “use”.
For instance, if you have a sore throat that won’t go away, you think “Maybe I have strep throat. I’ll go to urgent care.” Urgent care takes a look, then a culture, and says, yup, you have strep throat. Charges you $100. They have an Rx cure for you. But if you know your home cures, so do you. They give you a prescription. You set it aside for a rainy day and maybe decide to treat yourself based on their confirmed diagnosis. You have just “used” your doctor in an ethical way to get information about your condition – for diagnosis. But you already know how you’re going to treat yourself. You actually may have already used your natural treatments and never had to go to urgent care at all.
I am going to lay out some ideas about how to do health-related research. Research is how you “get started” and internet research is sort of “cross cultural” in the sense that lots of treatment ideas pop up for any health problem you type in. Some from strangers on the other side of the world. Some from the Mayo Clinic. Not all are useful. Some may be dangerous for you. You’re an adult.
But first some cautions:
Not everything spoken or written is true — even if the speaker says it in good faith. If the speakers says it in bad faith you may never know, and it can kill you.
I don’t like Big Pharma running the world. But there are drugs it produces that save lives and you’d better know what those are. You are allowed to be a “cafeteria practitioner” when it comes to your own life – take the best you can find anyplace on the shelf, no matter whose store, so to speak.
There is also a ton of hooey written about “natural cures” – so everything that is “natural” is not healing. There is a LOT of soggy science and snake oil sold under the “natural” label. If natural healing is the route you’re going, then you had better find out what is real, and why, or else stick with traditional medicine and be grateful for it. Taking responsibility for your own day-to-day healthcare is an “adults only” decision. You will dedicate a good part of your life to it. You will be reading and doing research while others are playing video games.
There is a lot of contradictory information on the internet. One site says that vitamin C is boosts the immune system and can even kill cancer. Another site says vitamin C can damage kidneys and even prevent other medicine from working. Other sites say only certain types of vitamin C are good. Other sites say some types are better than other types.
So let’s start with good old vitamin C. The late Dr. Linus Pauling, who won a Nobel Prize for his vitamin C research, used plain old “ascorbic acid” that is very inexpensive. Other researchers like other versions of vitamin C such as “calcium ascorbate” or magnesium ascorbate. [I typed best type of vitamin C to take and came back with this site: http://www.vitamincfoundation.org/ and on that page found “What form is best”] Who is right? I don’t know. That’s your job to find out. I do know that selling vitamins is a business and if I’m trying to sell generic ascorbic acid which is so cheap it’s practically free, I’ve got tough competition and a lot of it. If I can make a compelling story that calcium ascorbate is better that plain ascorbic acid, I’ve at least broken away from the herd. I happen to take “calcium ascorbate” rather then just ascorbic acid. It’s easier on my stomach. But I found out for myself. And I don’t care that it cost 5 cents more per dose.
But first, a word on conventional cancer treatments
Here are some interesting quotes from seriously qualified physician oncologists – cancer specialists about cancer treatments. If you question available treatment options, you’re in good company – with the same people who prescribe the treatments.
[The quotes are from this site: http://www.curenaturalicancro.com/2-physicians-refuse-chemo.html]
The great lack of trust is evident even amongst doctors. Polls and questionnaires show that three doctors out of four (75 per cent) would refuse any chemotherapy because of its ineffectiveness against the disease and its devastating effects on the entire human organism. This is what many doctors and scientists have to say about chemotherapy:
“The majority of the cancer patients in this country die because of chemotherapy, which does not cure breast, colon or lung cancer. This has been documented for over a decade and nevertheless doctors still utilize chemotherapy to fight these tumors.” (Allen Levin, MD, UCSF, “The Healing of Cancer”, Marcus Books, 1990).
“If I were to contract cancer, I would never turn to a certain standard for the therapy of this disease. Cancer patients who stay away from these centers have some chance to make it.” (Prof. Gorge Mathe, “Scientific Medicine Stymied”, Medicines Nouvelles, Paris, 1989)
“Dr. Hardin Jones, lecturer at the University of California, after having analyzed for many decades statistics on cancer survival, has come to this conclusion: ‘… when not treated, the patients do not get worse or they even get better’. The unsettling conclusions of Dr. Jones have never been refuted”. (Walter Last, “The Ecologist”, Vol. 28, no. 2, March-April 1998)
“Many oncologists recommend chemotherapy for almost any type of cancer, with a faith that is unshaken by the almost constant failures”.(Albert Braverman, MD, “Medical Oncology in the 90s”, Lancet, 1991, Vol. 337, p. 901)
This kind of talk from doctors should give persons facing cancer, and looking at alternative treatment options, all the evidence you need to do your homework to find anything that works besides what your local doctor is trying to sell you.
Some FICTIONAL examples to illustrate how I do research:
Say that my aunt is diagnosed with “breast cancer”. Of course we know what the treatment is: surgery, followed by radiation and chemo. Or sometimes radiation, surgery, chemo/radiation. Some of the time it works. Often it doesn’t. You want to know if there are alternatives.
The big deal about any localized cancer is the fear of “metastasis” – where the cancer cells migrate to a nearby lymph node and from thence spread to other parts of your body.
After we get done with “breast cancer” research, I’m going to run through some “metastasis” statistics that will blow your socks off.
Hint: Before you start your research, create a folder in your “bookmarks” or “favorites” where you’ll keep the website addresses that you like. This will save you hours of re-research. Label the folder exactly what you’re researching, not just “health”.
Hint #2: Before you click “save” or “done” in your book marked sites, make sure the title is about what you just read. Sometimes, the website leaves the name blank or inappropriate, such as: “132.5” or “Randy’s Blog” – not “breast cancer treatment protocols”. If a stupid name is there, just change it. Most bookmarks have the title already highlighted so that if you type, you don’t even have to delete first.
Here we go . . .
First search engine phrase: breast cancer alternative treatments That is precisely what I’m looking for, so why not, right?
A LOT of stuff comes up. You can spend a lifetime here. So I refine the search.
Search: Alternatives to surgery for breast cancer
On that page I find “Breast Cancer Treatment Alternative Hyperthermia” – it’s a youtube. This augments traditional treatments. Let’s say you want to find something that totally replaces traditional approaches.
Search: Breast cancer treatment without surgery or radiation
Lots of results. You’ll notice that as I search I put in my search in “real word phrases” – I don’t try to guess which words the search engine will eliminate. Why? Because some smart people actually put key words in real phrases, not just words. And the search engine might find my actual phrase in the content.
But we still don’t have a “drill down point”.
In desperation I search cancer cures that work
I avoid the “paid” sites and the first site listed is www.cancertutor.com. I know this site and I think it’s where your research should start, but I deliberately went through all the steps that I would take if I didn’t know about this site, until the site popped up. If you read this site, you’ll notice that most alternative cancer treatments rely on alkalinity and diet to “kill” cancer cells – or, more often, to revert them back to normal cells. This is the tried and true formula in most alt-cancer research.
I think you’d find good ideas on cancertutor.com, but I know of a very unusual treatment that has not shown up in search results yet, so I’m going to continue my search as if I didn’t know about it.
Search: breast cancer alternate treatments youtube
Two click-and-play videos come up in first place on the google page.
They both are alternative or complementary treatments – but my goal is to find a true alternative – without surgery.
Search: breast cancer alternative treatments video testimonials
Near the bottom of page one I find “A horrifying breast cancer “testimonial” for “holistic” treatment. I want to skip over it, but I’m scared that some alternative treatment has hurt someone, so I read it. Someone has taken offense that a woman claimed on Oprah that she had Stage III breast cancer and she elected to avoid conventional treatment and the woman is still alive when she should be dead so clearly, the website argues, she never had Stage III cancer. So I read it and the piece actually mentioned that many alternative healthcare practitioners believe that too acid blood makes us susceptible to cancer and alkaline blood levels kill cancer. The author doesn’t believe that, but he mentions it. So I classify this as a scare piece without any helpful data one-way or the other.
The last article on the (first) google search page is Cancer Candida and Fungus – Dr. Simoncini natural.
I click on it. It’s a crowed amateur-looking website. But I recognize the treatment: sodium bicarbonate. Baking soda. It looks like there is enough stuff on this site to keep me busy for a week. But I’m interested. I know that baking soda is very alkaline. So I cheat, rather than dig into the depth of the website, I bookmark it for later review and move on.
I go back to the search engine and type: simoncini sodium bicarbonate breast cancer video
Yup, there are testimonial videos of at least one woman cured of breast cancer using Dr. Simonicci’s techique. There are plenty of websites. There are websites about his history, videos of his TV appearances, info about his prominent place in Italy’s medical community as an oncologist (cancer doctor), the loss of his license for his treatment protocol, the eventual the restoration of his license and the present and growing success of his clinic in Rome.
So, I cheat again: simoncini cancer video
Yup, lots of stuff there including videos of him talking with various talk show hosts and just himself in front of the camera. He seems well credentialed and rational.
So I dig deeper: cancer treatment baking soda
First site listed on google? www.cancertutor.com – one of the very early sites we looked at. The circle is complete. I click on it. The site host pegs the cost of conventional treatments, which the site notes don’t work, at $350,000 and the cost of this treatment at $3.
There are links to videos.
Somewhere in this circle of sites, I believe, is something that could be called an effective alternative to conventional cut, burn and poison treatment protocol that 75% of real doctors don’t believe in.
What did I learn?
Well, it looks like how “doctors” treat cancer depends on what they think the cancer process is. There are alternative practitioners who feel cells get “infected” with microbes and this event is the start of all evil. Kill the microbes and the cells return to normal. Dr Simoncini believes the invading element is the candida fungus. Lots of women are familiar with this fungus. This is one nasty fungus. It does NOT want to die. I learned in my research that traditional doctors do not subscribe to the alkalinity-kills-cancer belief and they, in fact, demean it as unscientific and simplistic. Yet almost all alternative practitioners, even fully licensed medical doctors with the licenses still in place, DO believe in the alkalinity-kills-cancer theory. The only alternative practitioners who don’t subscribe to the alkalinity route are ones that believe in electro-medical interventions. Rife frequencies and what not. This may amount to a different way to kill invading organisms than alkalinity. If electro-magnetic radiation works, then we’d have both a chemical (alkalinity) and electrical way of effectuating a cure. We don’t have to solve this for the world today, we just have to get someone we care about well.
I personally know Webster Kerr at the Alternative Cancer Research Foundation that’s behind cancertutor.com and I know that he puts a lot of good thinking into things before he posts them. I know he believes that eating five apricot seeds a day will keep you cancer free. The seeds contain trace amounts of cyanide (B 17) which kills cancer cells before they form large colonies. Cancer cells cannot build up an immunity to cyanide. One theory about laetrile (another name for vitamin B 17) is that it works SO well that it can kill cells so quickly that the dead cells overwhelm the immune system of the already injured cancer patient’s body (in trying to rid the dead cellular debris). That’s why it can work and the patient still die. In any event, I take B 17 (a very mini tablet) or eat my 5 almond seeds every day.
Does it work? I don’t know. But it seems benign and is cheap insurance.
If you want to check it out for yourself, search: apricot seeds cancer
Lots of pros and cons on those pages.
About what you find in your research
Your basic belief will determine what information you find credible. If you believe that doctors and big pharma are zero-ing in on a cancer cure, then that is what you are going to find to be true. There is plenty of information to support your belief.
If, on the other hand, you read the statistics and think that “modern medicine” is not doing too well with cancer, and what it does do looks barbaric (that showed my bias, didn’t it?) then you will find truth perhaps in alternative treatments.
However, once you leave “white coat” medicine territory, you’re basically on your own. You run into faith healers, dingy backroom clinics, witchdoctors – along with the occasional true physician who decided to find cures wherever he or she can find them – irrespective of formal training, licenses or degrees. A healer is defined by his results, not his outward appearance or training certificates.
METASTASIS – SPREADING OF CANCER
One last search example: cancer biopsy metastasis (You’ll remember that metastasis is when cancer spreads from a localized area to overwhelm the entire system. This is “bad news”.)
The very first result is should you get a biopsy of that lump?
The website suggests: “No. Hell, no.” And it makes sense why. But there are no footnotes.
I look further down the google page. I do note that most are about “breast cancer”.
I make a new search: what are the statistics that needle biopsy causes cancer to spread
First two results clearly are amateur opinion against needle biopsies so I don’t read. The third one is AFH Library – 50% of Needle Biopsies Spread Cancer. Sounds professional. As soon as I click on it I notice that it’s an “amateur” site, too, but a quick glance gets me a clue to a real study done by the John Wayne Cancer Institute in California.
I’m going to let you continue your research into excision or needle biopsies but you’ll quickly get the idea that either extracting a mass or puncturing it to get a quick peak is a dangerous affair statistically. I had a few needle biopsies before I researched this. I’m still here. Fortunately “they” found nothing, so nothing spread. I had one done a my favorite dog before I researched this and the site where the needle punctured the skin erupted, ballooned out the skin the size of a baseball, and the dog was dead in weeks. Only afterwards did I do my homework and found what I believe to be the truth. Not one doctor ever warned me about the adverse statistics produced by a “simple and safe” needle biopsy!
What did I learn? If a cancerous “mass” is suspected, the first thing I do (and I’m not recommending this to YOU) is to do nothing except try alternative interventions before I let a doctor break into the mass for a look-see and take a chance on spreading it. As soon as “it” metastases, the white coats are going to need to do something right away because I’ll be dead very quickly if they don’t – and most likely if they do, too.
If you do a lot of reading about “cancer” you’ll learn that a tumor, the mass, doesn’t necessarily go away after the cancerous cells are gone. The “ideal” then is to kill the cancer yourself and then have the mass removed afterwards if it bothers you. Otherwise, leave it alone.
PROSTATE CANCER
The rough parallel to breast cancer in women is prostate cancer in men (although men do occasionally get breast cancer). I am going to give you MY read on this but, again, this is an opinion. You’re an adult, do your own research and form your own opinion. Doctors routinely measure the “PSA” level in men as they age. A high PSA level is a possible sign of prostate cancer. But if you read about PSA tests, the correlation between prostate cancer and elevated PSA tests are not great. Meaning they don’t mean as much statistically as doctors would have you believe. In my opinion definitely not enough correlation to base a life decision on it.
Fact: Most men who live long enough have cancer cells in their prostate gland at autopsy. Fact: Almost none of those aged men with cancer cells in their prostate died from prostate cancer. Any “biopsy” needle or other invasive procedure can break the protective “shell” of the prostate and start metastasis. Don’t believe me. Do your own research.
If you do your research, there are many, many ideas about how to prevent prostate cancer or deal with it if you have it, without removal of the prostate or doing any biopsy procedure. There sure as hell are alternative protocols to reduce enlarged prostate and allow easy urination again. That can be cleared in days!
There is a lot of disagreement about whether youthful levels of testosterone in older men encourage prostate cancer. Or, if not cancer, then benign prostate enlargement that makes it harder for older men to urinate fully. There is a lot of research that show that as men age, they produce less testosterone and more estrogen. Estrogen in men is largely stored in fat. If you’re aging and have a “spare tire,” your testosterone is going down and your estrogen is going up. Your challenge is to do research on how to boost your testosterone naturally and/or decrease its conversion to estrogen – which it tends to do.
There are also androgen gels that you can rub on yourself that boost testosterone levels. (Do not let your wife or girlfriend help. If they do, they will soon have a beard!) Testosterone gels can be useful but are not wholly “benign” and without risks and require careful monitoring that your doctor may not aggressively pursue. If you have an enlarged prostate, there is some medical opinion that increasing testosterone is bad. Other opinion says that it’s not only good, it’s essential, and will help prevent prostate problems including cancer.
What is the truth? I don’t know for you. But one thing I do know. You cannot walk into a regular “white coat” doctor’s office with an elevated PSA count and an enlarged prostate and get any answer except: no testosterone supplements, take this pill, or “let me do a needle biopsy – we’ll numb it up and you’ll hardly feel it.” You’ll hardly feel it, ok, because there’s a chance you’ll be dead in three months if it is cancer and spreads rapidly.
STOP THE PRESS
Last night after I wrote this, I got an email from the Life Extension Foundation. Here it is:
| Mainstream Doctors’ Ineptitude Put on Display ?in The New England Journal of Medicine
A study published in the June 30, 2010 edition of The New England Journal of Medicine confirms how little conventional doctors know about prescribing testosterone to aging men. The Life Extension Foundation® (and its medical advisors) long ago recognized that maturing men have a propensity to convert (aromatize) testosterone into estrogen. When you see an overweight man growing breasts, it is not directly because he eats too much. This phenomenon is instead caused by the testosterone he converts to breast-enlarging estrogen. When men are prescribed testosterone gels or creams, they sometimes have to take an aromatase-inhibiting drug (like Arimidex®) to prevent their estrogen (measured as estradiol in the blood) from climbing to dangerous levels. Optimal estradiol blood levels in men are between 20-30 pg/mL. Elderly males can have much higher estradiol levels that place them at substantial risk for developing coronary atherosclerosis and thrombotic stroke. If elderly men are prescribed large doses of topical testosterone gel or cream, their estradiol blood levels have to be tested and properly controlled. Failure to manage estradiol in men receiving high-dose testosterone gel or cream can result in a catastrophic estrogen surge that increases vascular disease risk and premature death. Enormous tax dollars squandered on flawed testosterone study The Federal government provided a financial grant to an armada of doctors to evaluate the effects of high-dose testosterone on men that were so severely debilitated that they struggled to climb more than 10 stairs or walk the equivalent of two city blocks. These men suffered numerous risk factors such as obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and elevated blood lipids that placed them at higher risk for cardiovascular events. Obese men tend to produce loads of estrogen in their abdominal fat — and typically have higher estradiol levels than thinner men. The men with the worst vascular risk factors (such as highest triglyceride levels) were placed on a dose of topical testosterone that is TWICE the standard starting dose. These debilitated men were given testosterone in a way that is more likely to aromatize through the skin into estrogen. Men with fewer vascular risk factors were given a placebo gel. It should be no surprise to learn that this study was halted prematurely because the debilitated men given the high-dose testosterone (with no aromatase inhibitor) suffered more “atherosclerosis-related events” such as heart attack, stroke, and sudden death. The official title of this study is “Adverse Events with Testosterone Administration.” A more accurate title may have been: “Elevated Estrogen Leads to Cardiovascular Events in Older Men.” Click here to read Life Extension®’s recent review about the dangers of estrogen imbalance in aging men, click here Life Extension writes a letter to these doctors The day this study was published, Life Extension wrote the doctors who conducted the study asking if there was any data regarding baseline and post-baseline blood estradiol levels. We have waited over four weeks, and the authors of The New England Journal of Medicine study have not responded to our repeated requests as to whether estradiol levels were ever measured. From what was written in the paper, it does not appear that any attention was paid to the estrogen levels in these debilitated men. The authors wrote in the discussion section of the paper, “Testosterone and associated increases in estradiol may promote inflammation, coagulation and platelet aggregation.” Yet these doctors don’t appear to have done anything to evaluate estradiol levels in the unfortunate study subjects given double-dose testosterone with no aromatase inhibitor to suppress the expected estrogen surge. This study had numerous other flaws Leaving aside the failure to manage estradiol levels in men given high-dose testosterone gel, there were numerous design flaws that call into question any conclusion that can be drawn from this study. As mentioned earlier, the testosterone group at baseline was at greater risk for cardiovascular events as manifested by a greater proportion of men in the testosterone group with dyslipidemia who were undergoing statin and antihypertensive drug treatment. In addition, triglyceride levels (higher) and HDL levels (lower) were trending against the testosterone group. Clearly, the baseline cardiovascular risk for the testosterone group was higher than the placebo group. The authors claim that a sensitivity analysis, as well as controlling for cardiovascular risk factors, did not change the results, but the small sample size and relatively short trial duration serve to magnify, not minimize, differences due to chance. The study was not designed to systematically assess for cardiovascular events, and given the small sample size, lack of consistent pattern of events, diversity of serious events, and small number of serious adverse cardiac events (10 vs. 1) in the two treatment groups before study stoppage in this short duration trial strongly suggest that the results are due to chance. Another explanation of course is that the adverse vascular events were caused by the uncontrolled conversion of the topically-applied testosterone to estradiol in men who were already likely to have dangerously high estradiol blood levels to begin with. Fodder for the media The published scientific data documents low testosterone as being an independent risk factor for heart attack and a host of other age-related ailments. The authors of this study acknowledge the benefits the testosterone group obtained from the drug and openly admitted the limitations of this study in providing guidance about the effects of testosterone on different population groups. The media, however, has a propensity to publicize one negative study while ignoring hundreds of positive ones. We will not be surprised to see this horrifically flawed study used for decades to discredit the safety and efficacy of properly prescribed testosterone cream and aromatase-inhibition therapy. Importance of blood testing in men supplementing with testosterone In response to overwhelmingly favorable studies, record numbers of aging men are rubbing testosterone creams or gels on to their skin each day to restore this vital hormone to youthful levels. Within 45-60 days of initiating testosterone replacement therapy, the following blood tests should be done to ensure safety and efficacy:
These tests can be done at your doctor’s office, or you can order them all directly from Life Extension by calling 1-877-354-6513 (24 hours a day) and asking for the Male Testosterone Panel (item LC100001). These tests can retail for over $500.00 at commercial labs, but Life Extension members pay only $125.00. Order your blood tests now! To review Life Extension articles describing benefits of testosterone replacement in aging men, click here: Optimizing Testosterone Levels in Aging Men, Vindication. Summary of 5 recent peer-reviewed studies noting adverse cardiovascular effects associated with elevated estrogen in aging men: 1) After adjustment for age, hypertension, diabetes, adiposity, cholesterol, atrial fibrillation, and other characteristics were made in a group of 2,197 men aged 71 to 93 years of age, men with the highest blood levels of estradiol had a 2.2-fold greater risk of stroke compared with those whose estradiol levels were lower. {Reference: Abbott RD, Launer LJ, Rodriguez BL, et al. Serum estradiol and risk of stroke in elderly men. Neurology. 2007 Feb 20;68(8):563-8.} 2) In a study of 313 men whose average age was 58, carotid artery intima-media thickness was measured at baseline and then three years later. After adjusting for other confounding risk factors, higher levels of estradiol were associated with thickening of the carotid artery wall. Researchers concluded, “Circulating estradiol is a predictor of progression of carotid artery intima-media thickness in middle-aged men.” {Reference: Tivesten A, Hulthe J, Wallenfeldt K, et al. Circulating estradiol is an independent predictor of progression of carotid artery intima-media thickness in middle-aged men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006 Nov;91(11):4433-7.} 3) In an angiographic trial of coronary atherosclerosis in a group of men with stable coronary artery disease, significant positive correlations between estradiol levels and other known atherosclerotic risk factors was observed. Researchers concluded, “Our results indicate a possible role of estradiol in promoting the development of atherogenic lipid milieu in men with coronary artery disease.” {Reference: Wranicz JK, Cygankiewicz I, Rosiak M, et al. The relationship between sex hormones and lipid profile in men with coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiol. 2005 May 11;101(1):105-10.} 4) In another angiographic trial of coronary atherosclerosis in men aged 40-60 years, compared with healthy age-matched controls, men with coronary atherosclerosis had higher levels of estrone and a low level of testosterone in the presence of a high level of estradiol. Researchers concluded, “Low levels of total testosterone, testosterone/estradiol ratio and free androgen index and higher levels of estrone in men with coronary artery disease appear together with many features of metabolic syndrome and may be involved in the pathogenesis of coronary atherosclerosis.” {Reference: Dunajska K, Milewicz A, Szymczak J, et al. Evaluation of sex hormone levels and some metabolic factors in men with coronary atherosclerosis. Aging Male. 2004 Sep;7(3):197-204.} 5) In a study of men having suffered an acute myocardial infarction (heart attack), a prior heart attack, and patients with normal coronary arteries, the results showed significantly higher levels of estradiol in both groups of heart attack patients compared with those without coronary disease. {Reference: Mohamad MJ, Mohammad MA, Karayyem M, Hairi A, Hader AA. Serum levels of sex hormones in men with acute myocardial infarction. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 2007 Apr;28(2):182-6.} |
I clicked on the “estrogen” link
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2010/may2010_Why-Estrogen-Balance-is-Critical-to-Aging-Men_02.htm and found some answers about how to reduce estrogen.
IF YOU SELL HEALTH CARE PRODUCTS ON YOUR WEBSITE, READ THIS ARTICLE. Why? Because, except for the prescription drug mentioned in the article, Life Extension actually sells the all products the article mentions. Did LEF link to them? No! Did it mention it sold them? No! They make you do your own homework about where to buy products. If you go to their website and type in the magic words, you’ll find the products. Will the sales copy make the same claims made in the article about the supplement? No. Please learn how to do this if you sell wellness products that actually do cure, prevent or treat a disease. You do NOT tell people how to cure, prevent or treat a disease and then “disclaim” around it at the bottom of your sales pitch. This gets you put in prison. There are no exceptions.
NEVER MAKE A CURATIVE CLAIM ABOUT ANYTHING ON THE SAME SITE YOU SELL IT. THIS IS A GO DIRECTLY TO JAIL CARD.
IN CONCLUSION
Medical doctors have many answers. They get to give you those answers, whether or not true, because you’re scared and you want something done NOW. Once the “white coats” bead in on a disease, they will move you rapidly through the system into their approved “program” – diagnosis, biopsies, more diagnosis, surgery, surgical removal, chemo, radiation – right up until you statistically die from their intervention. “We’ll need to move fast to get this thing before it spreads” are the first words. If you hear these words, even though you’re scared, please see an alternative physician and get on the internet and start reading before you cave into your fear and let the “white coats” have you.
As I have said, you best chance of treating yourself, when deadly disease strikes you, is because you’ve done it for years for smaller disease and you strongly believe in your ability to heal yourself and because you have found alternative practitioners you can rely on.
I rag constantly on the FDA. But, truthfully, God did not mandate that there even be an FDA. The FDA cannot stop you from healing yourself if you want to. It can make it darn hard for someone else to treat you, but not for you to save yourself if you truly believe you can.
THE IMPORTANCE OF DIAGNOSIS AND LAB WORK
One of the things that Western medicine does extremely well is obtaining the data to make their diagnoses. Analyzing blood chemistry, magnetic resonance imagery, tomography, etc. In this man’s opinion, you need to get this done before you even attempt an alternative treatment program for yourself. This is your baseline. It tells if you’re making progress or not. There is a blood test for cancer markers out of the Philippines you can read about in cancertutor.com. I have not used it, so I offer no opinion. But perhaps it belongs in your arsenal. The point is, you have GOT to know where you’re starting from and if your alternative or conventional treatments are working. This is a very good use of traditional doctors who are usually required to give you prescriptions to get diagnostic testing done. And if you’re not a radiologist, you should have one read and interpret the data for you.
By suggesting that you get testing done thoroughly and immediately is not because I necessarily believe Western medicine’s explanation of the disease or certainly not their protocol for treating it. But estimating “presence” of “something” unusual and the “size” and “density” and other not-normal blood work characteristics confirms something is amiss.
Here is my reason for strongly suggesting you get a benchmark as quickly as you can about the state of your health. If you are opting out of traditional treatment protocols it should be a rational decision, otherwise you’re just heading back into someone else’s box. In life, we DO get to choose the boxes we want to live in (such as Jewish or Catholic or Methodist or Asian medicine or Indian medicine or Western medicine) or we can create our own “belief systems”. Hopefully the edges of your own belief system are flexible enough to embrace “what works” and not rigid orthodoxy.
Once you leave “white coat” territory you have just left “civilization” behind, so to speak, and you can feel alone and quite naked very quickly. That is why I believe it is important to know precisely where you are starting from. There are number of strong alternative treatment protocols but, since it’s your life, you had better be prepared to monitor progress and change protocols if the initial protocol you chose isn’t showing results in the time frame it is suppose to. That is why a baseline is so important.
Many of you will find your way to “alternative treatments” when you or your loved ones are in Stage IV – weeks left to live where no traditional treatment is working. There is not going to be a chance for more than “one shot” at a “Hail Mary” alternative protocol like those mentioned in cancertutor.com.
And this comment brings me full circle to my urging that you take charge of your health, your wellbeing, as soon as you can. And learn to keep yourself “well” by taking many small corrective steps. It is said that when a rocket was on its way to the moon (this was before Obama killed NASA) the rocket is never on course. It is always off course making very small corrections toward its true course. This precisely describes what you must do for your health. Find your course – your homeostasis of wellness. Most of us don’t even know this any more, but you’ve got to start someplace. Where you seem to be “ok” and then take small steps to keep yourself “on course.” You will actually learn that when you start doing this, that your trips to “the doctor” to treat your “illnesses,” grow less frequent.
One of the failings of allopathic medicine is that it can intercede in trauma situations and save your life. But saving your life is not necessarily returning you to your true healthful course through life. You will have to find others, or yourself, help to do that.
Watching yourself learn about your health and actively involving yourself in your health will cause you have a belief that YOU can manage much about your wellness. And this is the start of your belief in your ability to find the people or drugs or herbs or supplements or protocols or treatments that actually work for YOU that YOU yourself manage. This will hopefully give you the courage to believe in your own judgment when it comes to life-threatening diseases.
