By Michael Prytula N.D.
P resident Richard Nixon declared War on cancer in 1971. Since that time the US has spent more than one trillion dollars on treatment and research. One trillion dollars! That is one thousand billion US dollars. Since that time the overall death rate from cancer has increased 5% and some cancers have increased several hundred percent.
The very basic concept of cancer is that cells of a certain type have gone amuck in large numbers. Cancer can be of two types: one benign (usually the good one) which is localized and only causes problems by its location and rate of growth; the second one is malignant which means it can move from one place to another (this is definitely the bad one). We all have cancer cells. I do. You do. Newborn babies do. Whether or not these cells will mutate depends on our immune systems ability to identify these cells as abnormal cells and kill them.
Cancer is caused by a number of things. The biggest causes are chronic stealth infections (microorganisms), chemicals, radiation and strong electromagnetic fields. Microorganisms causing cancer include adenoviruses, herpes viruses, hepadenoviruses, and papovaviruses which includes the now famous SV40 virus. The notorious and now famous SV 40 was found as a contaminant in the polio vaccines in the 60s and 70s. SV 40 is the cause of AIDS in monkeys and brain cancers in humans.
Investigating microorganisms as a cause for various cancers is only now being explored. Since 1967, when the US Surgeon General, William H. Stewart, made the statement “the book is closed on infectious disease,” the funding for the investigation of microorganisms as a causal factor for cancer and other diseases dried up. Then billions of dollars went into research on genetic causes of cancer. This research has made no appreciable difference to the life expectancy, quality of life or treatment of cancer or other diseases. Cancer-causing genes have been found. So what? Has this finding made any difference in life expectancy or quality of life? It is interesting to note the current biotech industry would not be where it is today without this research.
Chemicals are other cancer causing agents. In 1990 Elihu Richter and Jerry Westin of Hebrew University’s Hadassah School of Medicine observed that between 1976 and 1986, Israel was the only country among twenty-eight that showed a breast cancer rate drop. They were anticipating a 20% rise in breast cancer mortality consistent with other countries. In fact, they observed an 8% drop. In the youngest group, instead of a 20% rise, the rate dropped 34%. Statistically this is a 50% change. In the study of cancer, this is enormous. The reason for this drop in mortality rates was the 1978 ban on three organochloride pesticides: alpha benzene hexachloride, gamma benzene hexachloride (lindane which is typically used for lice treatment), and DDT. There are many studies showing the toxic effects of chemicals. Interestingly, chemical companies have paid for studies that come to the conclusion that chemicals are good. Yet independent, non-industry organizations show significantly that chemicals are harmful. This poses the question of whose interests are being served?
Radiation is yet another known carcinogen beyond a doubt. ElectroMagnetic Fields (EMF’s) are known to cause cancer. Electricians are ten times more likely than anyone in the general population of developing cancer (leukemia).
The mechanism as to how cancer becomes established is always the same, oxygen deficiency. Two-time Noble Prize winner for medicine, Otto Warberg, theorized that cancer was caused by the replacement of oxygen with the fermentation of sugar. In an oxygen-deprived state, the normal tissue cells regress in their development and start to behave like bacteria utilizing sugar as their means to get energy. Cancer cells, when they behave like bacteria, lose their growth inhibition. They do not remain anchored to other cells and have an indefinite proliferative life span.
Conventional therapies for the battle against cancer include chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery. Patients need to beware that what their medical doctor shares with them regarding cancer treatments does not present the entire picture and the doctor’s word should not be taken as gospel without further research. In 1978, for example, the Office of Technology Assessment, an arm of the US Congress, issued a major report concluding that only 10-20% of all procedures used in medical practices have been shown to be efficacious by controlled trial. In other words, 80-90% of what doctors implement as treatment is unscientific guesswork. Since then this study to my knowledge has not been repeated, as it would only serve to strengthen the case against these conventional therapies.
The pharmaceutical industry, which is the most profitable industry in the world, has a strong vested interest in what goes on in all countries’ governments but in particular the industrial nations. On Capitol Hill in Washington DC there are 625 registered lobbyists that are on the pharmaceutical industry payrolls. That is more drug lobbyists than senators and congressmen together. Unfortunately, I have not found similar statistics for Canada, though I have no reason to believe that the situation is much better here. In the US more than half of the pharmaceutical lobbyists were either former members of congress (21) or worked in congress or other federal agencies (295). These are hired guns are to ensure that the interests of the pharmaceutical industry are well served. In the 1999-2000 US federal election $262 million was spent by this industry for political influence. Governments are not immune to the influence of the long arm of the pharmaceutical industry. Pharmaceutical companies are not interested in winning the war on cancer. Their interests lie in waging the war on cancer, not winning the war. Why? In waging a war, maximum profits for pharmaceuticals are guaranteed by those convinced of victory over a bitter enemy, regardless of the evidence to prove otherwise.
Two- time Nobel Prize winner Dr. Linus Pauling wrote, “Everyone should know that the war on cancer is largely a fraud .” According to the US National Cancer Institute: a five-year survival rate for cancer for all nationalities was 49% in 1974 to 1975 and 50.7% in 1981 to 1986. This represents merely a 1.7% improvement in thirteen years. Even with a positive change this may be a statistical artifact as the trend towards earlier diagnosis is certainly a factor. However, from 1947-1984 the overall incidence of cancer in the general US population grew by 40%.
Over the years, official medicine has poured billions of dollars into radiation, chemotherapy and surgical research as the major weapons in the war on cancer. The overall cancer death rate has risen by 5% since the war on cancer began. (Richard Waters, “Options”, 1993.) Dr. Alan Levin of the University of California Medical School stated, “most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy”. According to Dr. John Cairn of the Harvard University School of Public Health, “Only 2-3% of the nearly one-half million Americans diagnosed with cancer every year are being saved by chemotherapy. ” In March 1971, a New York Journal of Medicine study found that 10% of 133 patients using the chemo drug 5FU (5 Flouro Uracil) died as a result of the drug’s toxicity. Some doctors jokingly refer to this drug as 5 Feet Under.
In February 1996, The WHO (World Health Organization) formally designated tamoxifen as a carcinogen. According to Dr Samuel Epstien of the University of Illinois, the drug tamoxifen is “a rip roaring liver carcinogen”. The National Cancer Institute and Zeneca Pharmaceutical lobbied to keep legislators from adding tamoxifen to its list of carcinogens. (Science News, March 2, 1996). Zeneca’s annual revenues from Tamoxifen were $470 million. Interestingly enough, Zeneca Pharmaceuticals is one of the world’s largest producers of pesticides and industrial chemicals. Zeneca makes the carcinogenic herbicide acetochlor and other chlorine products creating annual revenues of over $300 million on these chemicals.
Acetochlor and all polychlorinated herbicides are estrogen mimickers, which is precisely what tamoxifen is used to block. Not surprisingly, who would know more about estrogens effects on the body and how to block this than the company who produces estrogen mimickers. Estrogen mimickers on their own have a one to one estrogenicity factor. This means that one molecule of estrogen mimicker acts like one molecule of estrogen. Put two estrogen mimickers together and you have a compound that can have an estrogenicity factor of 1600. This means that the effects of two molecules of two estrogen mimickers can act like 1600 molecules of estrogen. It is broadly known that estrogen is a significant cause of breast cancer.
An NCI (National Cancer Institute) study followed 46,355 women and tracked the 2,082 cases of postmenopausal breast cancer that occurred among them. Women on estrogens only were 20% higher risk. Those on both estrogens and progestins had a forty- percent higher risk. A UCLA study found that women who received combined Hormone Replacement Therapy for five to ten years were 51% more likely to develop breast cancer.
Radiation is another weapon in the war against cancer yet radiation is also a major cause of cancer itself. According to internationally respected radiation expert Rosalie Bertells, her research provided evidence that mammographies cause more cancer than they detect. And regular mammographies cause cumulative radiation damage not to mention that as a diagnostic tool they are very ineffective. This crude method will detect cancers that are no less than seven years old. Yet radiation therapy is a cash cow for most cancer therapy hospitals and clinics. Not to mention, most doctors are lavishly treated by pharmaceutical companies with gifts. According to ABC Primetime Thursday night, (Feb 21,2002) doctors were coerced with $6 billion in parties, gifts and trips to “educate” medical doctors.
Surgery for cancer is, in my opinion, a good therapy. Yet radiation and chemotherapy are toxic substances which in turn can, and do, generate cancer. Adding a poison to kill a poison is not good math for our bodies. Yet government bows to the dictums of industry which supports and promotes these aggressive interventions.
Government institutions are generally against alternative medicine. As an example,the Ontario government proposed deregulation of Naturopathic Medicine in 1982 as one MPP explained, “Naturopathic Doctors are not a threat to the public and do not need to be regulated because since their legislative inception in 1925 they have not killed anyone. Therefore naturopathic doctors do not need to be regulated.”
This animosity has been prevalent in government for many years. As a response to proposed deregulation, naturopathic doctors and their patients created the most powerful lobby of the Ontario government for two years running. The Ontario government then succumbed to public demands and retained the Naturopathic Medicines Drugless Practitioners Act while promising to get naturopathic medicine inclusion into the Regulated Health Professions Act. After countless submissions by the Naturopathic profession and systematic delays by at first the Liberal government, then the NDP government, and finally the Progressive Conservative government, none have taken the legislative commitment to the profession nor to the public.
In the US, official medicine also stifles alternative medicine. The Office of Alternative Medicine was established within the National Institute of Health and given a mere $2 million research budget. Yet the same year, the National Institute of Health spent $68 million of taxpayers’ money on a single research trial for one drug. One chemical received 34 times more funding than an entire research department that funds non-patentable research.
The pharmaceutical industry not only coerces governments, it also coerces your monetary donations. The American Cancer Society claimed it reached 71 million Americans in 1991 (21 million more than it reached in 1988) with its public education programs. Yet from 1988 to 1991 cancer death rates rose 5.3%. In 1970 the American Cancer Society was accused of hoarding millions of dollars worth of publicly contributed funds. During the same time, wages and salaries accounted for 25% of all expenses. This is“a very efficient voluntary organization,” says Burton Goldberg in his book, “Definitive Guide to Cancer”. Is the situation in Canada any different? It is important for you to be wary of where and what your donations are doing. Your donations may be ensuring maximum drug cartel profits. Has either cancer society ever mentioned anything about researching pesticides as a cancer cause and if so, were the results ever made public?
Imagine that your body is the house of your soul and you have been putting garbage in one room in your house for years. Eventually, this garbage finally attracts flies. Flies are like cancer. Chemotherapy and radiation therapy may kill the flies but they also contribute to the garbage. So if you don’t get rid of the garbage the flies will come back.
(Be sure to read the next installment of this article in our Fall 2002 issue of The Natural Healer, which will explore how to clean up this garbage in a safe, healthy, natural and effective way).
To read part two of this article in the fall 2002 issue of The Natural
Healer,
click here
Michael A. Prytula is a Naturopathic Doctor who graduated from The Canadian
College of Naturopathic Medicine in 1988. He has taught in both a clinical and
an academic setting and he has received extensive training abroad to continually
enhance and expand the wide range of healing modalities and therapies offered
through his clinic. You can contact Michael at his St. Catharines office at
(905) 684-4934 or visit his web site at
www.NaturoMedic.com
|
|
|
The Natural Healer Magazine - your window on the alternative health community in Niagara, Welland, St. Catharines, Hamilton, Brantford, Burlington, Oakville, Mississauga, Kitchener/Waterloo, Cambridge and Toronto. |
By Michael Prytula N.D.
I magine that your body is the house of your soul and you have been putting garbage in one room in your house for years. Eventually, this garbage finally attracts flies. Flies are like cancer. Chemotherapy and radiation therapy may kill the flies but they also contribute to the garbage. If you don’t get rid of the garbage the flies will come back. Cancer can be the result of this garbage we collect from infection, chemicals, radiation and electromagnetic fields. These concepts were discussed in my previous article, “Cancer: What You Might Not Have Been Told – A Naturopathic Perspective” (The Natural Healer, Spring 2002 Edition, pgs, 16-18, click here for part one).
To begin to clear out the garbage, we have two major systems by which our bodies detoxify chemical compounds: Phase 1 and Phase 2 detox pathways. Chemicals are grouped as endotoxins (produced from inside the body) or exotoxins (produced from outside the body). Our bodies detoxify the majority of chemicals through Phase 1 detox where the substance is made either water soluble and goes to the kidneys to be eliminated, or it becomes more toxic in preparation for Phase 2 detox.
In Phase 2 detox the chemical has an amino acid added to it (the most important of which is glutathione). This makes the compound either water soluble to be urinated out, or fat soluble to be excreted by the liver into the small intestine and out through the stool. This is how our bodies eliminate toxic wastes. Interestingly enough, this is the precise pathway by which pharmaceutical drugs are monitored for their excretion rates and toxicity. It is important to note that if these detoxification pathways are not working effectively then we become susceptible to the toxicity of drugs, chemicals, environmental toxins, and toxins created by our own metabolic processes.
According to a 1994 study published in the journal Nature, workers at a chemical factory in Turin, Italy suffered an extremely high incidence of bladder cancer. The liver detoxification pathways were the only metabolic pathways that could be correlated with the incidence of cancer. The workers who had the most dysfunctional detoxification pathways were the ones who developed bladder cancer.
Of the many alternative therapies that can benefit cancer patients, there are a few from which I have seen the best results. The word “benefit” can mean cure, prolonging life, coexistence with one’s diagnosis, or easing one’s passing. In my clinic, we always aspire to cure. The following are those we have found to yield the best results:
1) Of primary importance is diet. For years naturopathic doctors have been advocating a diet with plenty of fruits and vegetables and fewer red meats. If you have been diagnosed with cancer, imagine that the cancer is producing toxins and the microorganism that caused the cancer is producing toxins, thus creating a toxic burden. To reduce the toxic load on the body it is important to reduce the chemicals in our foods and consume fewer animal products. It is a known fact that as you go up the food chain chemicals increase in concentration. The next thing we must do is to deprive the cancer and the microorganism that may have caused cancer of its food supply. Cancer cells behave like bacteria and as such their metabolism is geared towards running on sugar (glucose). So in response to this we should consume no sugar or sugar derivatives, and no compounds that can easily be turned into sugar (i.e. processed flour products and alcohol).
2) Water treatment like a reverse osmosis water unit is essential. Your kidneys along with your liver are the most important organs of detoxification in the body. If you don’t use a water filter then you are the water filter.
3) If you can afford it, treat the air in your house with UV light and HEPA filtration or similar technology. Oxygen deprivation is a primary cause of cancer.
4) We must ensure optimal functioning of both the kidneys and liver, as these are the main places where chemicals are detoxified through Phase 1 and 2 pathways. This can be accomplished by the following:
5) Ozone therapy is, in my humble opinion, one of the most important therapies for cancer today (ozone is O3, oxygen is O2). Ozone is very unstable and highly reactive. Most people have heard of ozone from air pollution advisories. Ozone is quoted and used as a gauge of air pollution simply due to the fact that ozone is the earth’s attempt to heal itself. Ozone is created as the earth tries to get rid of pollutants.
However, since ozone is the easiest chemical to gauge, it is apparently much better to blame ozone than a specific chemical that would point the finger at one particular company or industry. It’s much easier to blame it on something much more nebulous and not take any responsibility for pollution and health problems caused by this pollution as the management in the world’s largest corporations have consistently shown of late.
Ozone kills microorganisms. It kills cancer cells, supports the body’s chemical detoxification pathways, neutralizes chemicals directly, increases oxygenation throughout the body, stimulates the immune system and controls bleeding. In fact ozone is so amazing in killing microorganisms that the cities of Montreal, Kiev, Moscow, Paris, Los Angeles, as well as 2,500 other cities around the world use ozone to purify their water supplies.
Ozone is also used by industry to break down industrial wastes to make them biodegradable. Ozone has been used in medicine since WW1 where Germany used it extensively to treat battle wounds and anaerobic infections. Ozone is so good at killing viruses that the Canadian Medical Association Journal published an article in 1993 showing ozone killing the HIV virus and the hepatitis and herpes viruses.
In 1991 research published in the journal Lymphokine and Cytokine Research discovered that a compound called tumor necrosis factor, which helps in identifying and killing cancer cells, was released immediately after ozonation took place. Researchers Bocci, Luzzi and Paulesu concluded that “this is of obvious importance not only for the treatment of viral diseases but also for immunodepressed and tumour bearing patients”.
The journal Science published an article by Dr. Frederick Sweet in 1980 finding that the growth of human cancer cells from the lung, breast, and uterine tumors was selectively inhibited by ozone. Cancer cell growth was inhibited by 40-60% and normal cell growth was not affected. The authors stated that, “cancer cells are less able to compensate for the oxidative burden of ozone than normal cells”.
6) Hydrogen peroxide is another therapy that shows great promise, (Ozone is O3, oxygen is O2, water is H2O and hydrogen peroxide is H2O2). H2O2 and ozone are called biooxidative therapies. Hydrogen Peroxide, just like ozone, is nonpatentable and therefore the pharmaceutical industries view these therapies, no matter how effective, as quackery, misguided science, and just plain heresy. H2O2 has properties very similar to ozone. H2O2 is an oxygenator; the body naturally secretes it to kill microorganisms and cancer cells, regulate hormones, and it is needed for the metabolism of protein, carbohydrates, fats, vitamins and minerals. In my practice, we use it intravenously only if we cannot use ozone. This can be due to the medicines the patient requires or if the veins are sclerosed (hardened), typically due to chemotherapy.
H2O2 is also used for the following:
In 1888, Dr Love, MD at the City Hospital in St Louis, recorded the first use of H2O2. Currently H2O2 and/or ozone are being used at almost every alternative cancer clinic in the world. In the October 1965 journal Cancer, an article related the initial investigations on the benefits of H2O2 on reducing tumor size so surgery could be successful. In the June 1989 journal Cancer, another article discussed the “delivery of cytotoxic (cell killing) quantities of H2O2 to Hodgkin’s Disease”. In the 1979 Journal of Experimental Medicine authors Drs. Nathan and Cohn wrote, “H2O2 contributes to the lysis (destruction) of tumor cells by macrophages and granulocytes (white blood cells) in vitro.”
High dose intravenous ascorbates (Vitamin C) have proven very successful in numerous cancer cases. It is known that small doses of Vitamin C act as an antioxidant and possibly work against chemotherapy and radiation. However high doses of vitamin C act as a proxident, therefore promoting increased oxygenation. It is well known in cancer research circles that cancer cells have very minimal amounts of an enzyme called catalase, which cells need to break down peroxides. Peroxides are derivatives of ozone, H2O2 and high dose Ascorbates (vitamin C). So if you can increase peroxides you can kill cancer cells. According to pioneer Dr Hugh Riordan, as published in the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine 2000, “Vitamin C is toxic to tumor cells”. Ultraviolet blood irradiation works along very similar lines as ozone and H2O2.
7) Hyperthermia has been utilized for cancer therapy since the ancient Egyptians. In 1977 the American Cancer Society removed hyperthermia from its unproven methods and in 1984 the FDA approved it as a medical procedure to treat cancer. Hyperthermia works by the heat cutting off nutrients and oxygen vital to the tumor cells by causing a collapse of the tumor’s vascular network. However to perform this technique the liver, kidneys and heart must be in near optimum functioning condition.
Several other therapies have also shown benefit in fighting
cancer. For example:
Hydrotherapy works very similarly to hyperthermia, however its application is
less aggressive and it is more supportive of the liver’s detoxification
pathways.
Colonics is a form of hydrotherapy whereby toxins are removed from the large
intestine and eliminated in wastewater.
Chelation is a therapy that removes heavy metals and also increases circulation
throughout the body. It is most noted in its application for heart disease and
peripheral arterial diseases.
Microorganism Elimination Technique is a novel energy technique that we have
used at NaturoMedic.com with guarded optimism. This therapy helps direct the
immune system to identify and kill cancer cells. We all have cancer cells. It’s
just a matter of whether our immune system identifies them as such and kills
them.
Botanical medicines have also been documented as having anticancerous activity.
However, the discussion of the many different botanical medicines available
today would be too broad an area to cover effectively herein.
In order to get rid of the garbage in our bodies and keep it out, we must be willing to walk the unmarked path of “vis medicatrix Naturae”, the healing power of nature. As you can clearly see, alternative, complementary, and naturopathic medicine all have anticancerous effectiveness. However, the political climate, the interests of profits, and lack of research funding have made it very hard for the pioneers in this area to make significant inroads into mainstream thought. The obstacles these pioneers face are much larger than the odds between David meeting Goliath.
Michael A. Prytula is a Naturopathic Doctor who graduated from The Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine in 1988. He has taught in both a clinical and an academic setting and he has received extensive training abroad to continually enhance and expand the wide range of healing modalities and therapies offered through his clinic. You can contact Michael at his St. Catharines office at (905) 684-4934 or visit his web site at www.NaturoMedic.com