Alternative Cancer Treatment - An unbiased discussion on the basic theories behind.

[dlorde]

Up to 22% of breast cancers remit spontaneously.
That's a lot of wriggle room for alt med.

I put in the 'up to' out of skepticism, because although the wiki said 22%, the paper was about cancer and fever and the abstract didn't mention remission at all! (I can't see the full paper).

 

[dlorde]

It is important to know, that this is an assumption made on the basis of studies on screening detected breast cancers such as this one: http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=773446

They are used by opponents of breast cancer screening as an argument that screening overdiagnoses cancers leading to unnecessary treatments.

Spontaneous regression of clinically detected breast cancer does not occur in followup studies on patients who opt for alternative therapy for breast cancer instead of conventional treatment. Here is a review of four such studies: http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=773446

This does not prove that it never happens, but it is fair to say that it does not happen in 22 % of all clinically detected breast cancers.

Thanks for that, I was a little skeptical of the wiki figure, as the reference doesn't mention remission...

 

[dlorde]

Thanks Dlorde!

I detect you are really into the Clinical trials work!

Not really, although I was a medical technician many years ago.

Good to hear your opinions are they must be well documented.

I don't follow you - I didn't mention documentation.

What you tell us about Clinical trials and placebo usage worries me to the point I will open a new threat on clinical trials and it's ethic implications.

Why? how else can we reliably distinguish efficacy from placebo effect? Remember the trial protocol must be reviewed and approved by the ethics committee to be allowed to proceed.

Your other opinions are leading right towards the point I will be making in my next post at the thread bottom.

They're not so much my opinions as my understanding of current legal requirements.

Thanks for responding in a sensible way!

You're welcome.

 

[fuelair]

Thanks, that's good to know, but it would be nice if - just once - the OP of a thread like this really was interested in an unbiased discussion.

Agreed -but mostly they just want to see if we can be suckered in by fraudulant "scientifical papers" and mystic healers.

 

[Mojo]

Once I was told here "there is no way to change body pH or blood pH". What is "acidosis" then? Is it not effect of bad food, lots of drinking, coffee and other INTAKES? Are my diets and protocols leveling up the pH?
I suppose while balance is attained the pH even goes as high as 8.2 or more before stabilizing. (upsetting the tumor?)

Blood pH is kept stable to within very close limits (about 7.35 to 7.45). If you manage to get it outside those you're going to be obviously very ill, or dead.

 

[PixyMisa]

Once I was told here "there is no way to change body pH or blood pH". What is "acidosis" then? Is it not effect of bad food, lots of drinking, coffee and other INTAKES?

Yes, it is not effect of bad food, lots of drinking, coffee and other INTAKES. It's effect of poisoning, injury, extended illness, kidney damage, or death.

(Unless you're a cow, in which case it might be your diet.)

 

[jli]

Thanks for that, I was a little skeptical of the wiki figure, as the reference doesn't mention remission...

The author of the Wiki article listed the wrong reference (ref. 2 and 3 are identical). I think he/she meant to use the paper I mentioned as a reference. I agree, that the study was well done, but again - there are limitations on the real world implications this study has.

 

[Pixel42]

I am FULLY AWARE of the so many dubious "alternative remedies" proposed i Internet.
I do believe the concerns manifested in this forums regarding those possible scams are truly justified.
The problem I see is there is no consideration regarding the Law of Probabilities which would lead us to think there could not be a 100% probability ALL those alternatives are unfounded and nonviable.

New treatments (and some old ones) are tested all the time to see if they're viable. All we're saying is that it's not possible to know if they're viable until they've been properly tested. We know from bitter experience that it's very easy for people to convince themselves that a treatment is effective when it actually isn't.

There are practical theories, where the developers are not speaking of a "cure" but of a strong process to bring the body to self correction of any ill process.

Great. Let's test them and see if the theories are right.

If alcohol is a real LARGE cause of death and loss, why FDA does not ask for triple blind clinical trials to demonstrate it's destructive effects and further banning?

We already have plenty of data which we can use to compare the health of those who drink never, seldom, moderately and excessively. Umpteen studies have been done, and the evidence is clear that small amounts can benefit health, but large amounts are damaging. AFAIK there has been no serious suggestion that alcohol should be banned since the 1930s.

And it is one sample of many highly health destructive propositions. Alternatives for medicine (including quackery and witchcraft) causes very little damage compared to other "legal" accepted things.

True. They aren't banned either. Not even smoking is banned.

Scientists test, collect data, and publish the results. People have the right to ignore those results when deciding what to eat, drink, smoke and use as medical treatments. They also have the right not to wait for those results before trying a particular medical treatment, and I can certainly understand why someone seriously ill might choose to do so.

The history of harmful treatments, the number of obvious scammers out there, and the way our cognitive biases can fool us into believing that ineffective or even harmful medical treatments work, strongly suggests to a sceptic that it is wisest to assume that any new (or old) treatment is ineffective until there is empirical evidence to the contrary. That might occasionally mean being late to take advantage of a treatment that does turn out to be effective, but it's far more likely to mean not wasting money, not being fooled by conmen, and not suffering ill effects from something that turns out to do more harm than good.

 

[jli]

About 10 days ago, the latest visited doctor (to keep track on clinical changes) measured a saliva 7.5 pH at 7:00 pm. Before I started both treatments my saliva pH remained close to 5.4 and a clear acidosis was taking over me!

pH in saliva is not a measurement of pH in th blood (and thereby the body). Ask the doctor for documentation that salivary and blood pH are correlated. If he can't provide it, then you may want to reconsider the usefulness of the test.

Once I was told here "there is no way to change body pH or blood pH". What is "acidosis" then? Is it not effect of bad food, lots of drinking, coffee and other INTAKES?

Acidosis (and alkalosis too) is the result of severe malfunction of the systems that work to maintain a stable pH. It is not an effect of bad food. See for example this article. Are my diets and protocols leveling up the pH?

I suppose while balance is attained the pH even goes as high as 8.2 or more before stabilizing. (upsetting the tumor?)

Fortunately that doesn't happen. Such a high body pH is deadly. Here is a good article on why the pH concepts of the alternative therapists are wrong.

 

[pakeha]

Oh! You want my doctors to pop in! Well.. I want your scientists to pop in!

I see I am SEVERELY disqualified to convey any information on myself!

I suppose you are a Doctor so you don't want to listen to an ordinary engineer!

Mike, may I ask you to please stop such a dramatic approach to posting about cancer treatment as it detracts from your message.
I said it would be interesting to know their actual diagnoses, without the filter of the patient's idea of what was said.
I'm sorry if you thought that was an insult to your engineering qualifications.

It is important to know, that this is an assumption made on the basis of studies on screening detected breast cancers such as this one: http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=773446

They are used by opponents of breast cancer screening as an argument that screening overdiagnoses cancers leading to unnecessary treatments.

Spontaneous regression of clinically detected breast cancer does not occur in followup studies on patients who opt for alternative therapy for breast cancer instead of conventional treatment. Here is a review of four such studies: http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=773446

This does not prove that it never happens, but it is fair to say that it does not happen in 22 % of all clinically detected breast cancers.

The author of the Wiki article listed the wrong reference (ref. 2 and 3 are identical). I think he/she meant to use the paper I mentioned as a reference. I agree, that the study was well done, but again - there are limitations on the real world implications this study has.

Thanks for your analysis, jli and to dlorde as well!

pH in saliva is not a measurement of pH in th blood (and thereby the body). Ask the doctor for documentation that salivary and blood pH are correlated. If he can't provide it, then you may want to reconsider the usefulness of the test.

Acidosis (and alkalosis too) is the result of severe malfunction of the systems that work to maintain a stable pH. It is not an effect of bad food. See for example this article. Are my diets and protocols leveling up the pH?

Fortunately that doesn't happen. Such a high body pH is deadly. Here is a good article on why the pH concepts of the alternative therapists are wrong.

Thanks for the links!

 

[Mojo]

It is time for me to say an IMPORTANT statement:

I am FULLY AWARE of the so many dubious "alternative remedies" proposed i Internet.
I do believe the concerns manifested in this forums regarding those possible scams are truly justified.
The problem I see is there is no consideration regarding the Law of Probabilities which would lead us to think there could not be a 100% probability ALL those alternatives are unfounded and nonviable.

I am FULLY AWARE of the so many billions of flies out there in the world.
I do believe the concerns manifested in this forums regarding those flies' choice of diet are truly justified.
The problem I see is there is no consideration regarding the Law of Probabilities which would lead us to think there could not be a 100% probability ALL those billions of flies are misguided in their dietary choices.

 

[pakeha]

I saw what you did!

 

[dlorde]

The author of the Wiki article listed the wrong reference (ref. 2 and 3 are identical). I think he/she meant to use the paper I mentioned as a reference. I agree, that the study was well done, but again - there are limitations on the real world implications this study has.

D'oh! that explains a lot... thanks for the correction.

 

[ehcks]

Blood pH is kept stable to within very close limits (about 7.35 to 7.45). If you manage to get it outside those you're going to be obviously very ill, or dead.

That's the annoying thing. Most of alt-med only works if all of biology is wrong.

Homeostasis.

You can't alter your blood PH by changing your diet. If your PH exits that very narrow range, you're either already very sick, or you're going to become very sick. We're talking kidney failure or advanced cancer level sick.

Even if you could alter your blood PH from the norm, you absolutely would not want to.

 

[Daylightstar]

Oh! Good question!

Flax Oil-Quark spending is about 10$ to $ 12.00 a week.
Strict diet actually brings my costs down by half as there is no meat, chicken, white breads, bakery, sugars, COFFEE, wine (oh boy!!!!!) and NO cooking oil!

Ph protocol not yet discussed causes me about $ 6.00 in Arm and Hammer stuff plus about $20.00 in grade A molasses. This protocol is only done 15 days and rests for another 15 days.

Check up Doctor fees are $100.00 monthly. (You see? Doctors do not even make BIG money either)

About 10 days ago, the latest visited doctor (to keep track on clinical changes) measured a saliva 7.5 pH at 7:00 pm. Before I started both treatments my saliva pH remained close to 5.4 and a clear acidosis was taking over me!

Once I was told here "there is no way to change body pH or blood pH". What is "acidosis" then? Is it not effect of bad food, lots of drinking, coffee and other INTAKES? Are my diets and protocols leveling up the pH?
I suppose while balance is attained the pH even goes as high as 8.2 or more before stabilizing. (upsetting the tumor?)

Sorry for the digression on you questions response! Also sorry for me saying all that above. I know it is my "testimonial on expenses"... Someone will say he wants to see my doctor's bill and food store invoices!

Well, the flax oil and cottage cheese don't don't seem to cost you an arm and a leg. Luckily you appear to have no diagnosis of malignant cancer ....

If I understand it correctly, a months worth of your favorite chow plus your doctor's checkup fees come to 174, of which your doctor's check up fee is by far the single most expensive part.

What is: "the latest visited doctor", do you change doctors like underwear?
What is the purpose of 'keeping track of clinical changes'? And which clinical changes?

 

[Reality Check]

It is time for me to say an IMPORTANT statement:
...usual wall of words and irrelevant stuff snipped...

So what?
Many peiple are FULLY AWARE of the so many dubious "alternative remedies" proposed.
The problem that you seem to ignore is that only why to find out which works it is test them. Of course there is no 100% chance that all of the alternative remedies do not work. It is more like 99.99999% !

We do not have to "accept natural remission of big cancers". We observe that these actually happen. Read Wikipedia: a study showing up to 22% of breast cancer cases showed spontaneous regression. Also note that cancer was not 100% fatal before treatments were available.

 

[Mojo]

We do not have to "accept natural remission of big cancers". We observe that these actually happen. Read Wikipedia: a study showing up to 22% of breast cancer cases showed spontaneous regression. Also note that cancer was not 100% fatal before treatments were available.

A fairly high proportion of autopsies reveal undiagnosed cancers that were not cause of death. For example, about 14% of men over 50 who have died of something else are found to have prostate tumours (ref: Margaret McCartney, The Patient Paradox).

 

[MikeAparicio]

To many to answer....

Wow!
When I read someone saying "diet has NOTHING to do with pH, health and well being" I am strongly moved to laughter! Sorry for it!

I suppose subconsciously a person expressing such concepts is really defending his bad diet practices, his love for trash food and his unwillingness to recognize more than 50% of all the people just in the USA is immersed in a real bad diet, obesity and chronic disease.

Although sometimes I impressed by the arguments in some posts, when I read text saying "there is no way to change body pH and also that food or anything you put in your mouth cannot change pH" I find a strong loss of logic in the reasoning, if any.

How do kidneys take charge of balancing pH?

They work on filtering or adding bicarbonate to the blood. So the low or high blood pH must be altered for the kidneys to work. It means logically the blood pH DOES change (sorry for screaming! lol) The respiratory system also contributes to restore the correct blood pH level.

How is it nutrients, poisons and medicines get into the blood stream? By the digestive system unless an injection is administered. If a person swallows bicarbonate water or other high pH intake such as greens, and other kinds of high pH food, it is absorbed into the blood and the pH consequentially raises or lowers depending on the pH values ingested.

Logically, during the process, the blood pH is momentarily changed. Yes or no? That is precisely why the system enters into pH compensation; because the blood pH is altered!

When "radicals" speak of "the blood pH cannot be altered" they are thinking in a temporal way, not in real time.

It is NOT only disease, kidney failure, diabetes, cancer etc. which can cause blood pH changes. It is certainly not! I asked the question to doctors at the Nutrition Faculty in my university and they clearly explained me the facts.
Food and any intake, whose pH value is not 7.0 will effectively change blood pH; not permanently of course, by the action of the balancing system, but it will.
Therapies based on that true fact take advantage of such momentary changes in blood pH to cause metabolic reactions. Same momentary changes can also disturb the body into an ill reaction and they are precisely the cause of many diseases.

Oh! by the way: They also told me saliva pH follows blood pH and although there is a difference in values,( saliva is consistently lower than blood) the rate is maintained so it can be used to test, in combination with urine tests an average value for blood pH.

I think there are points where you have to twist the arm folks! No matter it is very hard for skeptics to do so!

 

[Daylightstar]

...
If a person swallows bicarbonate water or other high pH intake such as greens, and other kinds of high pH food, it is absorbed into the blood and the pH consequentially raises or lowers depending on the pH values ingested. ...

Please doctor Mike, explain what happens with nutrients (Acidic or alkaline) between entering the stomach acid and entering the blood stream?

Thank you.

 

[jli]

Wow!
When I read someone saying "diet has NOTHING to do with pH, health and well being" I am strongly moved to laughter! Sorry for it!

I assume you mean me. I stand by my statement that diet does not alter pH. I have linked to explanations for why this is so. If you choose to disbelieve it, then so be it. The other part that diet has nothing to do with health or well being is not something I (or anybody else) have implied or believe is true.

I suppose subconsciously a person expressing such concepts is really defending his bad diet practices, his love for trash food and his unwillingness to recognize more than 50% of all the people just in the USA is immersed in a real bad diet, obesity and chronic disease.

I am not an american. And I have no desire to defend my bad eating habits. I fail to see what relevance this has to an attempt at explaining how pH-regulation in the body functions. A well documented phenomenon that isn't even controversial.

How do kidneys take charge of balancing pH?

They work on filtering or adding bicarbonate to the blood. So the low or high blood pH must be altered for the kidneys to work. It means logically the blood pH DOES change (sorry for screaming! lol) The respiratory system also contributes to restore the correct blood pH level.[/QUOTE]

You are approaching an understanding of what goes on. From your writings it appears that you believe that pH regulation is working so slow, that pH would exceed the normal range. This is wrong. The mechanisms you describe (and the body's own bicarbonate buffer) work very fast. You will not obtain a pH of 8,2 in your blood by eating a teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate mixed with molasse (feel free to disbelieve me if you will).

How is it nutrients, poisons and medicines get into the blood stream? By the digestive system unless an injection is administered. If a person swallows bicarbonate water or other high pH intake such as greens, and other kinds of high pH food, it is absorbed into the blood and the pH consequentially raises or lowers depending on the pH values ingested.

It has to pass through the stomach , which has a very acidic environment (pH 3). It also takes time for nutrients to pass from the digestive tube and into the blood stream. There is plenty of time for the buffer systems in the blood, and the regulatory mechanisms in the kidneys and lungs to keep pH within normal range

Logically, during the process, the blood pH is momentarily changed. Yes or no? That is precisely why the system enters into pH compensation; because the blood pH is altered!

Let's become a little bit mathy, and use our basic knowledge about the bicarbonate buffering system.

This is the set of chemical reactions that are in equilibrium:

CO₂+H₂0↔H₂CO₃↔HCO₃^-+H⁺
And this is the formula that connects pH and the concentrations of CO₂ and HCO₃^-in the blood:

pH=pK-log([CO₂]/[HCO₃^-]

pK=6,1 (look it up if you don't trust me)

From this equation we can calculate directly that when pH=7,4 the ratio between CO₂ and HCO₃^- is (approximately) 1/20.

This translates into, that the equilibrium is shifted towards bicarbonate, which again means that there is quite a lot of bicarbonate in the blood already.
Let us now calculate the ratio between CO₂ and

HCO₃^- at pH = 8,2:

log([CO₂]/[HCO₃^-]= pK - pH = 6,1-8,2 = -2,1

This gives us that

[CO₂]/[HCO₃^-]= 10^-2,1 which is the same as saying that ratio between CO₂ and HCO₃^- = 1/126 (approximately).

So if you want to momentarily increase your blood pH from 7,4 to 8,2 you would have to instantaneously increase the concentration of bicarbonate considerably from a level that is already high. I'll leave it up to you to decide if a diet would be able to do that. If that is your firm belief, then so be it.

I asked the question to doctors at the Nutrition Faculty in my university and they clearly explained me the facts.
Food and any intake, whose pH value is not 7.0 will effectively change blood pH; not permanently of course, by the action of the balancing system, but it will.

Ask them how much the pH can change, and ask them for documentation (ie. scientific data or a textbook of physiology).

Oh! by the way: They also told me saliva pH follows blood pH and although there is a difference in values,( saliva is consistently lower than blood) the rate is maintained so it can be used to test, in combination with urine tests an average value for blood pH.

Run away from them and don't look back. Or ask them for documentation. There are lots of documentation that salivary pH is influenced by salivary flow rate. How do you imagine that stimulation of salivary production (for instance by imagining eating something deliciously unhealthy food) can change blood pH? This silliness would be the consequence of a correlation between salivary and blood pH.