Supplements and Cancer: What Works

What Really Works? Part One

Sunday, 09 January 2011, from Ralph Moss, PhD

Coriolus versicolor (Turkey tail) mushroom One of the hardest questions to answer is which, out of the many supplements really benefits cancer patients? There are many self-interested statements of benefit, but an inadequate amount of objective research on what is effective and what is not. I therefore want to call your attention to an interesting article from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC). It compared the following seven botanical extracts and fractions: (1) H-48 (a Chinese mixture of herbs) (2) Coriolus vesicolor,  or its derivatives: purified polysaccharide-K (PSK) or purified polysaccharide-peptide (PSP) (3) Maitake mushroom extract (4) Echinacea (5) Astragalus root (6) The yellow spice turmeric; and (7) β-glucan derived from yeast. All of these are popular supplements used by cancer patients. The MSKCC authors looked at the ability of these substances to induce immune reactions in laboratory mice. Specifics on these products, and how they were tested, are given in the reference below. (The full paper is available for free, and readers should consult that text for details). The bottom line of the study was this: Consistently significant activity was seen with four of the preparations: (1) Coriolus mushroom extracts (especially PSK); (2) Alcohol extract of astragalus ; (3) yeast β-glucan; and (to a lesser extent) (4) Maitake mushrooms. Little or no adjuvant activity was demonstrated with H48, Echinacea extracts or a water-based extract of astragalus. The results with turmeric were mixed (but the New Chapter brand of turmeric was active.) Coriolus versicolor (also called Trametes versicolor or Turkey tail mushroom) is available from a number of sources. I will have more to say about Astragalus in a future blog entry.

Read more »

Posted in: cancer,Ralph Moss,supplements

CLUCK FOR THE CURE PART 1, AND NOW PART 2

Regular readers of Natural Health News are aware of the concerns we have raised over "cause marketing".

I am very pleased that Dr. Moss has also recognized this serious issue and I will add Part II when it is published.

My advice for now is not to engage in the 'Race for the Cure', eat plenty of fruits, vegetables and skip the pink bucket from KFC.

Cluck for the Cure PART 1
By Ralph Moss, PhD Sunday, 25 April 2010

Last week we were told that fruit and vegetable consumption allegedly has no beneficial effect on cancer incidence. This week we learn that in order to fight cancer we should buy a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken. The sprawling chicken purveyor and Susan G. Komen for the Cure® have teamed up "to raise funds and spread breast cancer awareness and educational messaging" via a campaign at 5,000 KFC restaurants.

Participating franchises will sell "specially designed pink buckets of grilled and Original Recipe chicken" and KFC will then give 50 cents to Komen for every pink bucket that is ordered during the promotion period. In addition, the lids of these special pink buckets "will have a call to action to get involved." The names of "breast cancer survivors and those who have lost their battle with breast cancer will be listed on the sides of the bucket." The campaign is called "Buckets for the Cure."

Coincidentally, KFC has been in the news recently for a great innovation in dining: the Doubledown. This is an all-meat sandwich, consisting of two pieces of bacon, two slices of cheese and the famous Colonel's Sauce, which contains soybean oil, sugar, chicken fat, monosodium glutamate (MSG), and other goodies. All of this cholesterol is packed between two boneless fried chicken fillets! This "breadless wonder" (as the Toronto Sun called it) first made its appearance at a few locations last summer and was so successful that it was launched across the entire US in April 2010. The original recipe version contains 540 calories, 1380 mg of salt and 32 grams of fat. The company's Web site boasts: "This product is so meaty, there's no room for a bun!" Apologists for the fast food industry have pointed out that Burger King's Triple Whopper has 76 grams of fat. The Doubledown is dietetic by comparison.

Then there's the acrylamide issue. In 2000 Swedish scientists discovered a chemical called acrylamide in such foods as potato chips, French fried potatoes, etc. (Tareke 2000). The Food and Drug Administration then conducted an analysis of the American food supply for acrylamide content and found between 117 and 313 parts per billion (ppb) in KFC French fries, depending on the location sampled. Relatively speaking, this is a very high amount.

Acrylamide is considered a "probable human carcinogen" (Hogervorst 2010). In rat studies, it increased the incidence of mammary gland (breast) cancer as well as thyroid tumors and scrotal mesothelioma. In humans, there is an increased risk of ovarian and endometrial cancers, renal cell cancer and oral cavity cancer, even in non-smoking women (ibid.).

A 2009 Dutch epidemiological study showed "some indications of a positive association between dietary acrylamide intake and receptor-positive breast cancer risk in postmenopausal never-smoking women (Pedersen 2009). Comparing the highest consumers of acrylamide to women in the lowest group there was a 43 percent increase in breast cancer in women with ER and PR positive cancers. (A Harvard study found no such association.).

Cluck for the Cure - Part II
Sunday, 02 May 2010

Last week we began a discussion of the alliance between Susan G. Komen for the Cure® and Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC). We conclude, with references, this week.

Pinkwashing

Barbara Brenner of Breast Cancer Action (BCA) calls the alliance between Komen and KFC an egregious example of "pinkwashing." This occurs "when a company purports to care about breast cancer by promoting a pink ribboned product, but manufactures products that are linked to the disease. Make no mistake," Brenner adds, "every pink bucket purchase will do more to benefit KFC's bottom line than it will to cure breast cancer."

She also points out that KFC, like most fast food chains, is overwhelmingly present in communities that have poor health outcomes. These social inequities can affect breast cancer mortality rates. "Given this disconnect, we are especially disturbed by this partnership," Brenner says. BCA has launched a campaign to break up the Komen-KFC liaison.

I am a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of Breast Cancer Action. In the past I have also been an advisor to Susan G. Komen. Frankly, I think Komen has made a misstep here. Although they will raise money for cancer research by this gambit, they have also providing cover to KFC by doing so. At a time when healthy eating is under broad attack, Komen has chosen to associate itself with products that may, ironically, be linked to an increased incidence of breast cancer, especially in poor and minority communities.

To quote Barbara Brenner: "What the cluck?"

Read more »

Posted in: Cancer,cause marketing,KFC,Komen Foundation,Ralph Moss

Discord on Mammography Roils the ACS

Ralph Moss is an active educator regarding cancer issues.  I am pleased to see his newsletter this week and read his coments on issues surrounding mammography.

Of concern to me is the focus on the American Cancer Society's resistance to consider the impact on breast cancer rates attributed to mammogram screening.

As Moss writes, "According to a front-page article in the New York Times, the ACS intends to abandon its rigid advocacy of mammography screening of the age 40+ female population."

My concern is that elsewhere throughouit the world where breast cancer rates are lower, many attribute this to avoidance of radiological screening in the under 50-60 age group.

As you know from reading articles here at Natural Health News, Creating Health Institute has been a strong proponent for thermography and ultrasound for more than two decades.

Listen to our recent 2 part series "Pink May Not Be Protective"
Listen to Herbalyoda Says! on Blog Talk Radio
Read more of the many articles here (use blog search), at Natural Healing through Natural Health and at GreenMuze.

Read more »

Posted in: ACS,mammogram causes breast cancer,Ralph Moss

Patrick Swayze and Cancer Thoughts

I am not much of a TV watcher and for the most part I have one so I can watch movies or play the workout videos I use as part of my daily fitness plan.

Last evening I made a deviation from the norm by watching the Patrick Swayze interview with Barbara Walters.

I was really most interested in what Patrick had to say, and his wife of almost four decades.

I also wanted to hear about the treatment he chose.

I admit I'm a Swayze fan of many years. I too enjoyed some youthful romantic escapades in the Catskills, and I hope his "ghost" hangs around from time to time.

He's been most courageous in his ability to be open and public through his illness and hopefully this stand will help many others. One thing he said that resonated with my work was what he said about how the chemo tore up his insides.

This is important on several levels. First of all this is such a common issue in chemotherapy and its one that is too frequently not addressed.

I have a friend who was just recently diagnosed with AML, a form of leukemia. I sent his wife a abstract I put together on nutrient deletions of chemotherapy drugs. This is a critical issue because of the wasting that so often is related to lack of nutrition and toxic body states caused by the chemo.

I also sent his wife another article written by Dr. H. Kenneth Schueler from New York. Dr. Schueler recently had one of his articles, "Clinical Trial of Pancreatic Enzymes: One View" included in Ralph Moss's newsletter.

This treatment used by Dr. Gonzalez, is based on the work of a dentist, Dr. William D. Kelley. Dr. Kelley was diagnosed in 1962 with pancreatic and liver cancer. He passed away in 2005.

Dr. Kelley's method is soundly based in nutrition. It is also brilliant in its understanding of physiology and biochemistry in the human body. It is one in which I have been educated, and I've seen the good results.

Gonzalez addresses the issue of toxic overload resulting from chemo and how current treatment models do not allow the body to process this waste. He also addresses nutrition and just how important this is in any cancer treatment plan. His research has shown about an 83% cure rate.

As Dr. Schueler says, we need to look again at this program, especially for pancreatic cancer. I couldn't agree more!

Nutrient Depletion in Chemotherapy- general to all chemo drugs in relation to side effects: dysbiosis, stomatitis, pancreatitis, adynamic ileus, gastric mucosa damage and realted damage to microvilli in small intestine, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and constipation.

All of the above side effects relate to malabsorption issues and to a high state of inflammation. The end result is malnutrition. Natural approaches can help substantially with all of the above. (GE)

Consider too the impact of over use of acid reflux drugs and the rising incidence of gluten allergy. There's more to it than smoking.

And you do not have to lose your hair! There is a natural supplement that not only can fight cancers but it protects you from losing hair.

More articles -

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2009/03/cancer-nutritional-and-environmental.html

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2008/09/finding-gene-is-only-one-part-of.html

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2009/03/supplements-reduce-adverse-effects-of.html

http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2009/04/black-cumin-and-pancreatic-cancer.html

Many more articles may be found by putting "cancer" in the search box in the header.

Read more »

Posted in: Cancer,Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez,Ken Schueler,natural cancer care,natural health news,pancreatic cancer,Patrick Swayze,Ralph Moss

NCI Issues Warning on Chemo Drugs

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) has issued a very negative report on the drug Adriamycin (doxorubin) as well the other anthracycline drugs (epirubicin and idarubicin). As we reported here in 2007, prominent oncologists had begun to warn their colleagues and the public that use of this toxic class of drugs was unnecessary in as many as 92 percent of the breast cancer patients who received it. This point of view has now been given powerful support by a new Canadian study in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (O'Malley 2009), with an accompanying editorial by Dr. Slamon (Slamon 2009).

The authors of the new article studied 438 tumor specimens from premenopausal women who had node-positive breast cancer and were given adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery. All the women received either a regimen known as "CEF" which contained, in addition to the standard drugs cyclophosphamide and 5-FU, epirubicin (an anthracycline); or they received an older regimen, "CMF" which contained, in addition to cyclophosphamide and 5-FU, the non-anthracycline methotrexate.

Scientists then looked for the presence or absence of certain markers on the cancer cells, called TOP2A and HER2. Their key finding was that patients whose tumors showed changes in these markers did indeed survive longer after receiving CEF (the anthracycline-containing regimen) than those treated with CMF. But they also showed that patients who did not have TOP2A changes had no significant improvement in survival (O'Malley 2009).

As Slamon commented in his accompanying editorial: "This report is the latest in a series of publications that question the generalized assumption that there is an incremental benefit to all breast cancer patients who receive anthracycline-based adjuvant therapy as opposed to non-anthracycline-containing adjuvant therapy" (Slamon 2009).

Slamon's remarkable editorial is available free of charge at the JNCI Web site. I urge all readers who are seriously interested in this question to study it carefully (link below). It contains much fascinating information on how the anthracyclines became part of the standard of care for adjuvant breast cancer chemotherapy.

Why does all this matter? Even in the world of toxic chemotherapy, Adriamycin (and its fellow anthracyclines) are notoriously dangerous: Slamon refers to the "well-known, long-term, and life-threatening problems associated with anthracyclines" (Slamon 2009). These adverse effects include cardiac toxicity including congestive heart failure as well as bone marrow dysfunction, including acute leukemia and myelodysplasia. These serious adverse effects have long been known. However, Slamon now presents data showing that "longer follow-up...of breast cancer patients who received adjuvant anthracyclines for their breast cancers indicates that our initial assessments may have underestimated these long-term toxicities" (Slamon 2009). In other words, the news about the long-term effects of anthracyclines is worse than we thought.

Slamon makes the further point that earlier assessments of the risks and benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy lumped all patients together in a rather crude way. "We now know that the molecular diversity of human breast cancers is much more complex and that clinical benefits derived from various systemic therapeutic interventions can be profoundly affected by the molecular subtype of the disease" (ibid.)

Since 2007 he has been courageously warning about the danger of the anthracyclines and calling for individualizing cancer treatment based on molecular characteristics of the tumor. I wholeheartedly agree. But I would argue that the issue is even larger. Oncology (like modern medicine in general) has a tendency to put patients into cookie cutter molds. The reason may be economics - it's more cost-effective to treat patients en masse with minimal time spent dealing with their individual characteristics.

But modern science (not to mention ancient humanism) tells us that each person is different, and that treatment should be individualize based on all aspects of the person. The molecular characteristics of the tumor are one important new part of that. But I would argue that this individualization should include chemosensitivity testing of tumors, the creation of autologous vaccines, and a more holistic approach that takes into account the psychological and social needs of the patient.

the above article is courtesy Ralph Moss, PhD.

Read more about supplements and how they help the health of people taking chemo.

Read more »

Posted in: Adriamycin (doxorubin),anthracycline drugs,cancer drugs,epirubicin,idarubicin,natural health news,Ralph Moss