Understanding alt med "testimonials" for cancer cures

Anonymous

Taken from orac's blog from 2004:

No doubt you've seen it. The alternative medicine cancer "testimonial." They sure can sound convincing. A chipper-looking person claims that this treatment "cured" his cancer. These testimonials almost always include some or all of these elements: First, the cancer patient is lost and suffering at the hands of "conventional" doctors, who either cannot or do not wish to understand and who cannot do anything for him. Then, when all hope seems lost, the patient discovers an alternative medicine "healer" or treatment. It is not infrequently described in quasireligious terms, like a revelation or something that brings the patient out of the darkness and into the light. Naturally, there is resistance from the patient's doctors, family, and/or friends, who warn against it, with doctors warning of dire consequences. Often, they describe themselves as "being sent home to die." But the patient "sees" that the treatment "works" in a way that medical science cannot and survives. Infused with fervor, the patient now wants to spread the word. Often, the patient is now selling the remedy. Perhaps you've seen such testimonials or heard them on the radio and thought: "Gee, this sounds great. I wonder if it works."

The answer is: Almost certainly not.

I thought I'd discuss these alternative medicine "testimonials," as they are one of the most visible and highly abused methods of selling alternative medical therapies. I will concentrate on breast cancer as the prototypical example, but many of the same comments apply to other diseases and treatments. In future posts, I'll compare testimonials with anecdotes and other types of medical evidence, and try to explain minimum standards for medical evidence.

But first, some terminology: The treatment of breast cancer is divided into two phases, locoregional control (treatment of the disease in the breast and the axillary lymph nodes) and systemic control (prevention of distant metastases). Surgery and radiation therapy are modalities for local control; chemotherapy and hormonal therapy, for systemic control. Adjuvant therapy is one of these modalities administered after surgery. Adjuvant radiation therapy will improve local control and lower the rate of recurrence in the breast. Adjuvant chemotherapy and hormonal therapy will improve systemic control and decrease the rate of development of metastases, which are usually what kill patients.

The reason breast cancer testimonials sound so convincing is that most lay people don't know a lot about the disease, particularly that surgery alone "cures" many breast cancers. Early stage cancers are cured by surgery alone more often than not, and a significant minority of patients with even large tumors and multiple positive lymph nodes can be expected to have long term survival with surgery alone.In the case of a lumpectomy, the local recurrence rate in the breast is in the 30-40% range. Radiation can reduce it to less than 10%. That means that women who forgo radiationare still more likely than not to avoid local recurrence in their breast, particularly if their tumor is small. As far as distant metastases, chemotherapy and hormonal therapy improve survival, but the effect is small in patients with early stage cancers and becomes more impressive with more advanced operable tumors. Because many breast cancer patients will do well with surgery alone, clinical trials with large numbers of patients are needed to find true treatment effects due to adjuvant therapies.

These facts help to explain breast cancer survivors who have undergone surgery but decided to forego chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy in favor of "alternative" medicine (Suzanne Somers, for instance). When such patients are in a good prognosis group, where recurrence is uncommon, or have a more advanced tumor but are lucky enough not to recur, often they attribute their survival not to the primary surgery, but rather to whatever alternative therapy they have decided to take, even though it almost certainly had nothing to do with their survival. To them, it was the alternative medicine that "saved" them, not good old-fashioned surgery. In contrast, women who opt for alternative therapy and then recur obviously don't provide good testimonials to sell alternative medicine, which is why you almost never hear about them.

Some might ask: Why do patients fall for this? It is not a matter of intelligence. In my experience, women who pursue alternative therapy are, more often than not, intelligent and/or highly educated. Instead, they do not possess the scientific knowledge or enough critical thinking skills to separate truth from nonsense in medicine. It also seems to be a question of human nature. The diagnosis of breast cancer is devastating emotionally. Formerly self-assured women feel themselves losing control of their lives. Unfortunately, our system of medicine reinforces this feeling of loss of control, as it is all too often impersonal and even disrespectful of patients. Patients find themselves going to multiple doctor's visits, where all too often they have to wait for hours in crowded waiting rooms to see their doctors, who then, thanks to the demands of managed care, often only spend 5 or 10 minutes with them discussing a life-threatening disease. They deal with voicemail hell trying to reach their doctor when they are having problems and endure other indignities. They often conclude from this that the system does not respect their time or them and that they are considered nothing more than a number, a disease, or money. In contrast, alternative practitioners often provide the human touch that is too often missing from modern medicine. They take the time to listen to the patient and make her feel good about herself and her decision, all too often giving erroneous information about chemotherapy and radiation therapy. When a woman makes a decision to choose alternative therapy, she often sees herself as "taking control" of her treatment from uncaring doctors whose treatments, she is told, do not treat the root cause of her disease. Understandably, she may feel liberated and back in control. In addition, many testimonials have religious overtones as well, where lost, suffering women misguided by conventional doctors and without hope find a savior (their "healer") and/or enlightenment (the "alternative" therapy) that leads her out of the darkness and into the light of health. Her ignoring the reportedly dire warnings of doctors (unbelievers) is validated. Filled with quasireligious (or explicitly religious) fervor, they want to convert the doubters. Depending upon a woman's background and beliefs, this religious appeal can be as powerful as the desire for regaining control.

That religion and spirituality should play such a large role in alternative medicine testimonials should not be surprising, given how much of alt-med is infused with New Age "spirituality" about living "energy flows" and connections with the earth. Consider, for instance, the concepts behind traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). These concepts are mostly based on a non-Christian religion (Taoism) particularly the emphasis of TCM on the need to correct "imbalances" between different kinds of spiritual "energies" in order to restore health. These concepts powerfully influence more of alt-med than just TCM. Sometimes, fundamentalist Christians, who would normally be very suspicious of such non-Christian concepts, manage find a way to infuse their brand of alt-med with their Christian religion (particularly faith-healing, which fits in well with alt-med spirituality) or to downplay inconvenient Eastern or pagan spirituality that underlies much of alt-med. (For examples of what I'm talking about check this and this out.)

Even doctors, who are trained to have the knowledge and critical thinking skills to know better, are not immune to falling under this spell. Case in point, Dr. Lorraine Day was Associate Professor of Orthopedic Surgery at UCSF and Chief of Orthopedic Surgery at San Francisco General Hospital in the 1980's. She made a name for herself through dire warnings of AIDS spreading through aerosolized blood during trauma surgery (although, as far as I can tell from PubMed, she never published any studies in peer-reviewed journals to support her claims other than this interview). In the early 1990's, she developed breast cancer. Her website and this annotated transcript of one of her informercials tell her tale. In brief, in 1993 Dr. Day underwent an excisional biopsy that showed a ~2 cm breast cancer, with tumor extending to the margins. She underwent what sounds like a re-excision lumpectomy, refusing the addition of axillary dissection, the standard of care at the time. She then started an alternative medicine regimen of diet manipulations and prayer. Nine months latter, she developed a small "bump" near her previous site, which (she claims) grew to the size of a grapefruit in only three weeks. She even posted a picture. (I have to point out that I've never seen a breast cancer--recurrent or primary--even a really nasty one, that looked like this or that grew that fast. Invasive breast cancers usually start ulcerating through the skin long before they stick out like that.) The mass was, according to her, partially removed surgically, after which she was "sent home to die," suffering many other physical symptoms in the process. She "cured" herself with a regimen that included various dietary manipulations and prayer. Dr. Barrett has posted a very good analysis of Dr. Day's story and a deconstruction of her infomercial, concluding that the second operation most likely cured her and that the grapefruit-sized mass was most likely not recurrent cancer. Given that Dr. Day has refused to release the pathology report for her last operation after having released her first pathology report and part of her second report (leaving out the part that tells whether the residual cancer had been completely excised with clear margins at her second operation), I tend to agree with Dr. Barrett's assessment. Very likely the last pathology report shows no breast cancer (in which case the second operation cured her) or a recurrent cancer that was completely excised (in which case the third operation cured her). Of course, Dr. Day could easily prove all us doubters wrong by releasing the last pathology report, but she does not.

I mention this case not to trash Dr. Day, but rather to demonstrate that even highly trained and educated doctors, who should be able to evaluate alternative medicine therapies dispassionately, can become their biggest boosters. Even if Dr. Day could prove that she cured herself exactly as described on her website, I would still ask her why she never did a clinical trial to see if her result could be generalized to others, instead of using her story to sell Barley Green and her books and videos. That would be what a real academic surgeon would do. If her recovery was as miraculous as she claims, it would not take very many patients or very long at all to show the efficacy of her regimen. Unfortunately, Dr. Day appears to take a dim view of even honest criticism and is not above threatening her critics with the wrath of God.

Never forget that alternative medicine testimonials exist largely for one purpose: To sell a product. Most of them are advertisements, nothing more. They are no more "unbiased" than pharmaceutical advertisements for their latest, greatest drug. In fact, they are worse, because at least the pharmaceutical companies have to be able to back up their claims with science and disclose potential adverse reactions in their ads. No such requirements exist for most alternative medical treatments, mainly because most of them claim to be supplements rather than medicines. The other problem with testimonials is that they don't rise even to the lowest level of medical evidence, the anecdotal report. Anecdotal reports in medicine require a careful documentation of symptoms, lab tests, diagnoses, exact courses of treatment, and a patient's response to treatment. Testimonials almost never present these elements in sufficient detail to judge whether the treatment actually did anything. There's just no way of telling truth from exaggeration or fiction.

So, in conclusion, be very skeptical of alt-med testimonials. If you look at them closely, you will often find that the patient did have significant conventional treatment (such as surgery); that the story is vague (often omitting, for example, the stage or histology of cancer or even whether the cancer was biopsy-proven); that there is no objective data, just references to other testimonials; or that the data mentioned either comes from alt-med websites selling a product rather than peer-reviewed medical journals or is a non sequitur about studies in peer-reviewed sources. Also remember that conventional medicine is not above misusing testimonials in advertisements. Treat them with the same degree of skepticism. Look for the scientific and clinical evidence, not stories of great cures, regardless of the type of testimonial. If there is one principle I hope to impart here, it is that the claims of conventional medicine and alternative medicine should be treated the same and that they should be held to the same standard of scientific and clinical evidence. I do not differentiate between the two when considering evidence, nor should you. I hope to expand upon this principle in the future

Susan144

Black Cat,

Thank you for writing! Like you, I find the success of surgery absolutely compelling. The rest of the treatments (especially in my case, which was Stage I) are of questionable value. 

The self-serving testimonials and the weak or non-existent evidence for the myriad of treatments and for "cures" (which my oncologist guaranteed me if I would just follow his multiple-med, multi-year plan) is disgusting. I hope you clarify some of the alt-med phoniness as well as the pharma-phony stuff. Have at it!

leaf

Good work, Black Cat. 

Of course I do not want to go back to the days of radical mastectomies, but in this 1950 article (which is probably before chemotherapy became available, and more breast cancer was more advanced since this is before routine mammograms), in this small study, found about a 25% 5 year survival rate. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1616589/?tool=pubmed  and this 1953 paper found about 14% of women lived 35-40 years beyond their radical mastectomy.  (Deaths were from all causes.) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1802815/?tool=pubmed

My grandmother had bilateral radical mastectomies in the early 1950s, and lived another 20 years, and died of an unrelated cause.  I was told never to talk about cancer in her presence.  I assume this was because breast cancer was commonly thought to be an 'automatic death sentence' at that time.

Yes, all treatments should be held to the same standard of scientific and clinical evidence.

Anonymous

Quote black cat:

"Instead, they do not posses the scientific knowledged or enough criticial thinking skills to separate truth from nonsence in medicine"

Hi black cat,

You are making a terrible terrible mistake of misjudging people who opted for alternative medicine. I can vouch that there are a lot of quacks or even probably well intended alt doctors like Dr. Day who probably became more self-serving in the end.

However, to judge us as not possessing scientific knowledge or withouth critical thinking skills to separate truth from medicine is a terrible mistake you can make.

I have a degree in Engineering and has been working as a Project Manager and Training Manager for global multi-national companies (2 years in AT & T, 5 years in Verizon Business, 5 Years for Micrsooft )-- so I do think that is a proof that I have the critical thinking skills enough for me to pass interviews and also do well in my performance appraisals.

I may not have a degree in medicine, but because of my crictical thinking skills and because of my technical background I do approach every issue from fact finding first... finding out the root cause and then reviewing all possible options and Risks, Assumptions, Issues and Dependencies (RAIDS).. in Microsoft and my current employer Royal Bank of Scotland we use a method called DMAIC method for us to Define, Measure, Analyze, Identify and Control processes, projects, solutions and issues.

I have used all my logical ang critical thinking skills to look at my mothers pathological reports, including the results of her endocrine tests, her hormone profile, her organic acid test, before I reviewed all possible options..listed questions before going to the endocrinologists, pathologists, oncologists, surgeons who saw my mother and respectfully asked my questions one by one.. until  I thought I have extracted all the information that they can give me, based on their capacities--- and if in case, they are overstepping their boundaries, I would also respectfully say.. thanks, I value your opinion..but...

It took a while for me to see a registered practitioner (endocrinologist)-- who helped me review all the data and help us form a treatment plan. Although he still promotes conventional medicine, he still gave us a few other options. I firmly believe that all doctors conv/alt must invest their time in making their patients comfortable to deal with the emotional trauma of BC. not that I expect everyone to be skilled in dealing with trauma-- but I would always appreciate doctors who can be logical and still very people oriented at the same time.

On a people perspective, I also talked to my mom a lot, finding out what is really important for her, and together we studied (for 3 months-- I took a break from full time work-- so that I can study with her)-- it took as 3 months to separate the wheat from the chaff, the quacks from genuine alt doctors, the insensitive conventional doctors from the more emphatic conv doctors. So given all the data we have, we made a decision to refuse chemo/rad and opt for non-conventional theraphy.

And yes, we do pray a lot and we believe that all treatment plans (whether conventional/alternative) is just a temporary fix and will not cure her from cancer, but we do know whatever treatment plan that was provided to us and what we have accepted as a standard of care, is permissible to God. He is not a GOd who would impose His choice to anyone, but rather give us the freedom to make rationale, well informed decisions based on our own convictions.

All the treatment plans (conv/alt) are just like umbrellas we use when there is a heavy rain (heavy rain being our cancer)-- but it does not stop the rain or the cancer.. the umbrella can prevent us from being wet -- but it will not stop the rain. Someday, the rain will stop and there will be no sickness, but it is not for us to determine when it will happen or even force God to make it happen anytime.

I would agree that cancer is not a death sentence nor it is a punishment from God, but rather a consequence of what we call a fallen world. Cancer does not choose anyone, regardless of religion, sex, age or nationality. but we can choose who to anchor our faith on -- regardless of your treatment plan (conv/alt).

Anonymous

here is a testimonial/blog which contains medical evidence and anecdotal report of the DX of my mother's cancer, including how we made a decision for every treatment she gets..

 http://nanaymiriam.wordpress.com

be patient to read from bottom up though, as the first entry was back in Feb 2010-- while my last entry is October 2010..

please do not take any content out of context, as everything is part of a whole..

for example, my last entry is about her organic juices and I3C, which may be taken out of context.. this is not all just about organice juices, and colonic irrigation and I3C, you cannot just quote a few phrases and say that we lack scientific knowledge and critical thinking skills.. read the whole blog then ask me questions later.. I will try my best to respond as my time allows it.

Anonymous

I also would like you to understand as a patient using alt theraphy, we do not have the time or the resources to create mega documentations of the history of diagnosis and treatments, and even some forego diagnosis and just continue with the treatment plan.

we just happen to be very big at diagnosis-treat-diagnosis process so that we can see if it is really working or not.

Whereas, conv medicine certainly have full time resources to document their studies, They even have enough money to run clinical trials (which are possibily sponsored by the Big Pharma anyway). If the sponsor of these clinical trials is the Big Pharma, then guess where they pledge their allegance to? Whoever gives the money gets the loyalty of those running clinical trials.

If the source is flawed, the whole system is flawed.

Anonymous

by the way, I do not have anything to sell, no agenda to promote, just wanted to share what we have experienced and hope that we can give you a more intelligent response representing the other side of the coin,

Hindsfeet

nanay, I love your blog! I am on the same journey. Cancer was a wake up call to find out why my body is broken, and take care of the problem. I'm better for it.

Alternative Testimonies...hmmm....It is my opinion that there are false testimonies in both camps. Most conventional cancer testimonies in my opinion is false advertisement. Chemo doesn't cure cancer. I have friends, who go from one chemo to another hoping it will cure their cancer, and they are dying. Their testimonies are sad. The doctor don't always inform you of the treatment side effects. They don't tell you that rads put you at risk for a new cancer. They don't tell you that radiation can cause lymphedema. All they say, you should do it.

Also, one must take into consideration that if a person choosing a particuliar alternative therapy does not change his lifestyle or diet...may get cancer again. Getting well is a multi facet job. Also studies comparing alternative, or surgery only to women who had therapy do not take in to account if the women, who did surgery only, changed their lifestyle or diets. Not enough information in the studies to make them reliable.

In the end each woman has the right to choose their path. Women who trust in convetnional treatment need to respect women who choose alternative.

formycyndi

Black Cat

Be careful who/where you copy and post......Not all is what it appears to be.

http://www.patsullivan.com/blog/2005/09/orac_unmasked_a.html

Txispa

Thank you for your information. we need some well informed minds willing to share  information. My doctor was not able to formulate any of your alternatives.  I am stage 1, 9ml.no nodes, onkotype test less than 3%. The dr. wants me to take arimidex for 5 years. I started in January and had horrible side effects. I don't want to take arimidex, and I don't think it is going to do anything for me. Please five me some feedback...

Thanks!

Anonymous

Txispa,

please find a good endocrinologist, who can get you tested for your Hormone Profile (ratio of 2OH and 16OH), and tell you how he can support your digestive system to help balance your hormones and probably reduce estrogen overload..

the subject of taking or not taking Arimidex, will enterily your choice.. Arimidex treats your hormonal imbalance in a different way-- and again even an honest endocrinologist, will not tell you to throw it away because professionals try not to deal with the turf of other professionals.. unless probably if they belong to the same Cancer Center and really have good relationship with each other..

again, please do not do this alone... go to an endocrinologist and try to discuss this with your onc (the one who prescribed you Arimidex)-- and see if he is supportive or not.. however, be prepared he may not know anything about the world of endocrine and hormones so he may dismiss that idea..unless if you convince the endocrinologist to go with you and talk to the oncologist himself. which is highly unlikely.

by teh way, since you are not her2 postive, you shoud feel better to know that yours is not as agrressive as my mother's cancer. yours is stage 1, no lymph node involvelment.

you have better chances of living a longer and better life, whether you use alternative or conventional. just please choose the right doctor and pray for someone who will support you through this .

Anonymous

by the way, sometimes the hormone profile test is called metabolic liver test or Urinary estrogen metabolite test..

the process involves taking either a 24 hours or a 10-12 hour urine sample.. am pretty sure this is available wherever you are..

Anonymous

evebarry,

thanks! I agree there are false testimonials on both camps...but it seems its easy to identify false alternative testimonials than the false conventional testimonials.

the false alternative testimonials lack the sophisticated marketing collaterals that covers false conventional testimonials-- the false conventional testimonials are so subtle in its approach you almost believe its true..factual and honest.

but still I know there are true conventional testimonials as much as there are genuine alternative testimonials-- the challenge is knowing which is genuine knowing that the lies could be so subtle or the horrible truths being downplayed while the nicer truths being promoted to outshadow the horrible part of the truth.

what I mean by genuine-- is not promoting any product , skill or idea..

cathmg

My grandmother had breast cancer in the 70's-radical mastectomy on one side, and no other treatment. She continued to eat meat, drink alcohol, smoke, and forego exercise. She died in her 80's of an unrelated cause.   A local mom chose no treatment for her breast cancer except a macrobiotic diet, and died 6 years later of her breast cancer.  These two examples from my own life make me leery of drawing conclusions about alt. therapies and diets curing cancer. I think it may give people a false sense of control over their cancer...and I think it draws attention from the potential cause of bc-environmental toxins and pollution.

Txispa

Thank you nanay,

I need to change onco. my last visit to him lasted 7 minutes and he left the room while I was still talking.

Anonymous

Txispa,

am including you in my prayer list-- may you find a good doctor who will take the time to hear you and help you form your collected thoughts. no matter what your decision is whether conventional or alternative... you need a certified doctor/naturopath..

someone who is really honest and concerned about your well being.. 

Anonymous

cathmg,

I was probably exposed to more conventional women who took the standard of care of conventional medicine and died anyway,,, but I was also equally exposed to women who did the alternative and very much alive now.

I agree that our biases are based on personal experiences or observations of what happened to our loved ones and close friends..

but it should not stop us from being open minded.. my family is very natural oriented.. I am probably the only poring over medical researches and translating it to them..

we have to get a balance of both worlds..not to be swayed in favour of another camp just because of our past experiences..

there is peace in knowing that you have some level of control on what gets in your body... and then leaving something else open to influence...

Anonymous

cathmg,

I would also agree that even if your grandmother or local mom-- eat all the right foods and yet still constantly exposed to invisble environmental toxins.. even conventional medicine may not work...

Anonymous

this is the reason why-- even if we are 100% sold on the alternative approach for my mother's ER+/PR- diagnosis-- I keep using diagnostic tests to measure her prognosis. but at the same time, reducing exposures to radiation. (avoid Mammograms, PET SCAN and xray).

for my mother's Her2+ BRCA gene 2 mutation diagnosis-- I keep digging.. and looking for an oncologist who would listen to our questions and help us form a decision.. (not forcing us to do it his own way or the high way).. to take Herceptin or not

for Trixpa's case though she need not worry about the Her2+ BRCA gene 2 mutation.. so its a different story altogether.

if I agree that one size does not fit all in the world of conventional medicine.. it should apply in the world of alternative medicine.

if I3C/DIM worked for my mother-- it does not mean it will work for Trispa

Anonymous

bumping this up

Anonymous

Black cat, you,re plastering the alt forum with pages and pages of Orac,s blogs. His arrogant and sardonic tone grinds on many people,s nerves. If anyone is interested in reading him, they can do so on the site where he rants which is sponsored by BigPharma, Tide, Colgate and other big corporations.

Anonymous

I detest and have zero tolerance for attention seeking people that have absolutely nothing of value to contribute.  I certainly do not reply to them as it is a waste of my valuable time. 

I have put you on ignore and ask that others do not give you the attention that you so childishly and selfishly crave.

luv_gardening

Name calling of another member reported.

Kathy044

Um, Luan

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/about.php

"In addition, Orac has been funded over the last decade by institutional funds, the Department of Defense, the National Cancer Institute, and various cancer charities. He currently receives no funding from pharmaceutical companies. Indeed, so bereft of pharmaceutical funding is poor, poor Orac that before his talks, when he is required to make his disclosures of conflicts of interest, he often jokes that no pharmaceutical company is interested enough in his research to want to give him any money. Maybe one day that will change, but for now, like most biomedical scientists in academia, he must beg the NIH and other granting agencies for the money to keep his lab going. Being a "pharma shill" doesn't seem to pay as much as supporters of alt-med think it does."

 Thanks for the bump Cat, though I agree somewhat with Luan that there has been a trifle too much cutting and pasting on BCO recently. I'll see if I can find a direct link to the archived Blog piece. Most interesting.

Kathy044

Here's the link, and no offending ads, nada

Monday, December 20, 2004
Understanding alternative medicine "testimonials" for cancer cures

No doubt you've seen it. The alternative medicine cancer "testimonial." They sure can sound convincing. . . . .

http://oracknows.blogspot.com/2004/12/understanding-alternative-medicine.html

There, now I feel better.Copyright notice is at the bottom.

Kathy

Anonymous

Kathy, thanks for posting the link.  When that blog was written 7 years ago there weren't ads. Scienceblogs now sadly has ads and some are downright offensive and completely absurd.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/05/more_quack_ads_on_scienceblogs.php

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/07/scienceblogs_ads_are_going_to_be_the_dea.php

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/05/an_unexpected_confluence_between_scienceblogs.php

Anonymous

Blackcat is projecting and talking about himself....so much hate, really scary, brrrrrr

rosemary-b

Testimonials mean nothing. Clincal trials have meaning.

Melizzard

Cathmg, there are no magic bullets.  No one thing works exactly the same for every person, ever.  Not alternative and not conventional.  But I'll be the first to say that I don't think diet alone is enough for an aggressive cancer.  Now, if one's diet is complete and utter crap then that person stands a better chance of benefiting from said diet change.  I treated my Stage IV disease with diet/lifestyle change alone (Budwig) and it didn't stop my cancer.  But during that time, I did know some who were having wonderful results with it.  So it didn't stop my cancer from progressing ... but it did others'.  Just because a therapy doesn't work for one person doesn't mean the therapy isn't any good.  If that were true, there would be no chemo drugs left.  They would've had to toss 'em all out long ago because no chemo drug works on EVERY person ... and us Stage IV gals are painfully aware of that. 

xxoo

Melissa

thenewme

.

rosemary-b

Isn't there a thread about people being paid for testimoials on-line?