Suzanne Somers on Dateline tonight

Here's the article if the link doesn't work.  BTW...I read Dr. Lerner's book.  It's terrific!

Suzanne Somers, Cancer Expert

This week, "Dateline" on NBC devoted an entire hour on Sunday evening to allow the actress Suzanne Somers to express her rather unconventional beliefs about cancer.

It is not the first time a major media outlet has given air time to Ms. Somers, whose journey into the medical realm has been featured on a variety of news programs, talk shows and entertainment channels. A few years ago, Oprah Winfrey invited Ms. Somers on her show to share the secrets behind her youthful appearance - a complex regimen of unregulated hormone creams and some 60 vitamins and supplements.

But is it entirely outrageous that respected media organizations continue to give the "Three's Company" sitcom star a platform to dispense medical advice? Not really, in a world in which celebrities have become among the most recognizable spokespeople - and sometimes experts - about various diseases.

And Ms. Somers is just the latest in a long line of critics, celebrity and otherwise, who have challenged mainstream cancer therapy. In the 1940s and 1950s, for example, an insurance salesman named Harry Hoxsey recommended a botanical treatment made from roots and bark. A well-known physician, Dr. Andrew Ivy, promoted krebiozen, which was derived from the serum of horses. Thousands of cancer patients spent substantial money on these nostrums, both of which were worthless. At the time, Dr. Morris Fishbein, editor of The Journal of the American Medical Association, called the people who promoted them "cancer quacks" and labeled them "vicious" and "unprincipled."

That these alternatives to traditional cancer treatments gained popularity after World War II is not surprising. In that era, cancer surgeons and radiation therapists became extremely aggressive in their efforts to remove or kill every last cancer cell. These treatments were extremely toxic, and most patients died anyway. Cancer patients were understandably searching for alternatives.

By the 1970s, celebrities were going public with their cancer stories, including the former actress and diplomat Shirley Temple Black and the first lady Betty Ford, both of whom were candid about their breast cancers. But it was the case of another celebrity with cancer, the actor Steve McQueen, that again focused attention on unorthodox therapy. In March 1980, The National Enquirer accurately reported that Mr. McQueen was undergoing treatment in Mexico for mesothelioma, a cancer of the lining of the lung, that his doctors had termed incurable.

Later that fall, one of Mr. McQueen's Mexican doctors held a press conference in which he announced that the treatment, consisting of dozens of vitamins, minerals and pancreatic enzymes, a reputed anticancer substance from apricot pits known as laetrile and detoxifying coffee enemas, was curing Mr. McQueen. It was not true. Mr. McQueen died of his cancer the next month. Nevertheless, thousands of cancer patients retraced his path to Mexico in search of a fruitless cure.

Now comes Ms. Somers, who, after receiving surgery and radiation for her breast cancer in 2001, declined chemotherapy in favor of a drug made from mistletoe extract.

Ms. Somers has since written a book, "Knockout," which relates her experiences with cancer and promotes several modern unorthodox physicians, including Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski and Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez. Dr. Burzynski, based in Houston, has treated more than 10,000 cancer patients with naturally occurring proteins that he calls antineoplastons. Dr. Gonzalez, who practices in New York City and has gained notoriety for his use of coffee enemas, uses a regimen similar to that given to Steve McQueen, although without the laetrile. The Food and Drug Administration has not approved either treatment, although the agency has given "orphan" drug status, a designation used to foster research of rare diseases, to antineoplastons for the treatment of certain brain tumors. And the National Institutes of Health provided a $1.4 million grant to study Dr. Gonzalez's cancer protocol.

The most compelling thing about Dr. Burzynski and Dr. Gonzalez are the patients they label as "cured." When I interviewed Dr. Gonzalez for a book on famous patients, I met several who had been told by mainstream oncologists that they had incurable cancer but who were very much alive five, 10 or even 20 years later.

Yet it is hard to know what to make of these anecdotes, however powerful they are. Medicine relies on formal scientific studies, and neither antineoplastons nor Dr. Gonzalez's regimen has been proved to be of value. Indeed, a recent study published in The Journal of Clinical Oncology showed that pancreatic cancer patients on average survived nearly 10 months longer with standard chemotherapy as opposed to what Dr. Gonzalez prescribes.

It may be that patients who experience long-term survival after unorthodox treatment were given faulty diagnoses or had cancers that regressed by themselves, a known phenomenon. Or it may be that the type of patient who has the time and money to pursue these alternative treatments is a healthier patient to start with. It is impossible to be sure.

So why does Ms. Somers promote these unproven therapies? She said she believes that oncologists do not inform end-stage cancer patients about nontraditional options, and that such people deserve to know.

Here Ms. Somers may have a point. Although oncologists are surely under no obligation to promote therapies they believe are useless or harmful, patients - especially those who want to explore every possible avenue - have the right to know that there are unorthodox cancer therapies that some people believe are helpful.

But not without several caveats, and that is where Ms. Somers, and many of those in the media who discuss her books and views, have failed. Ms. Somers says she is promoting hope, but false hope benefits no one.

Many people with end-stage cancer are, understandably, desperate, and thus potentially vulnerable to a sales pitch - even an expensive one. But here is a case when an informed patient may truly be a wiser patient. Perhaps if doctors were more willing to address the fact that these nontraditional treatments exist, and share what we do and don't know about their effectiveness, an actress like Ms. Somers would have less influence, and science would speak louder than celebrity.

Barron H. Lerner, M.D., professor of medicine and public health at Columbia University Medical Center, is the author of "When Illness Goes Public: Celebrity Patients and How We Look at Medicine."

Gosh...I am hearing all this speak putting alternative medicine down.  I think it is a shame.

I have breast cancer, discovered July 12th, I think.  Anyway, I immediately started eating properly...no sugar, at all...and I have always considered ice cream my drug of choice.  Oddly, I had been eating a couple of gallons a week!!!  Shame on me!

I decided on chemo (AC and Taxol) first, them surgery, then radiation.  By the time I arrived for my first chemo appointment five or six weeks later, my tumor had decreased in size by half, and the only thing I did was change my diet.  My doctor said that was impossible, and I had to insist that he check.  He couldn't even find the tumor.  I suffered through chemo, like many of us have, and decided to wait on surgery.  Chemo was a nightmare, but, at the time I thought it was the right thing to do....now, I am not so sure.

I need more information.  My surgeon mis-informed me my twice:  telling me that biopsies and sugeries don't cause cancers to start up elsewhere in the body....that is documented, and that makes me very mad!!!  Then the day I went to speak with her before surgery, she decided to mention to me that the back of my arm would be numb and tingly for the rest of my life.  I like to know everything up front, so I can make the decisions.....I am shocked at the way these doctors think all their patients are sheep...and blind ones at that!.

My oncologist used Adriamyacin and Taxol, which don't work for my type of cancer....but, it is "standard of care"  [legal term that means 'cover your ass].

Things I learned:

That Adriamyacin will very likely be taken off the market because of its ineffectiveness and severe side-effects.  Its is NOT effective on 92% if cancers and not effective on ER+ breast cancer.  This information is published by accredited cancer journals. 

I also learned that my life may be extended only by a couple months....not years, by suffering for five-six months on chemo....but, they won't know that until I live the 'required' five years that they consider a cure, even if I die after five years and one day, it is still considered a cure.  I consider a cure to be for the rest of my life.  And, I do intend to live to be 150.  No joke.

I will be seeing a doctor that treats the body from a nutritional standpoint....then I will consider surgery, and radiation....but, not until then.  I want tests done that tell where my body is from a health standpoint, and I want to correct the things that are out of balance.  I want to be as healthy as possible before going on with surgery or radiation. I have been extremely disappointed that neither of my doctors has offered ANY advice to keep my healthy.  I was told walking helps and not use a vegan diet, don't use St. John's Wort, and use no soy products.  (Personally, I don't like any soy products.)

I firmly believe that nutrition is VITAL.

I also believe it is more than that though: nutrition, your beliefs, your will and faith to conquer this disease, and the ability to become healthy.  I don't believe you can defeat this disease if you are not able to eat, and bring your body as close to healthy as is possible.  Cancer is a disease of the body, not a lump in our breast.  Many doctors are treating the symptoms of the disease, but not so interested in treating the whole body.  I want the underlying cause to be fixed, not the tumor mass to be removed and tossed in the waste can.  Until, we are healthy we will not be able to conquer cancer and stay healthy.  Standard of care is chemo to shrink the tumor mass, surgery to cut it out, and radiation to 'kill' any remaining cancer cells.....they hope.  It is unbelievable to me that doctors will treat symptoms of disease, but, do not have the tools to treat us for vibrant health.  Doctors are very intelligent, and very kind, but, afraid to recommend anything not approved by the FDA.  I have read that they are not allowed to recommend any type of treatment that is not approved by this agency.  I don't know if that is true or not.

It saddens me at how gullible the public is when it comes to medical care, and how they have been frightened by the media and the government (FDA) when it comes to alternative treatments.  My family was terrified when they found out I have cancer, and cried and screamed until I agreed to rush into some treatment.  I have never been a fan of doctors, so I have a bit of an attitude, and I knew nothing of cancer, except that it terrifies everyone.  I wasn't really frightened, I think I was in shock maybe, but I haven't been terrified.  Only recently have I come to accept that I have cancer, and that only I can really take care of my body, and that doctors can only treat my symptoms of my disease.  I have always been 'the healthy one', but, the last several years I didn't care....I am sad to say.  Maybe this disease is to shake my world and make me re-focus my life.  I don't consider cancer a death sentence, I believe it is controllable, and even curable.  

I believe each of us must make out own decisions about the type of care we accept, and I respect each choice as being the best one for oneself.  For me, I need more information...and I can't get a straight answer from the medical professions.  After all, oncologists use chemo...it is their job, surgeons cut....that is their job, and radiologists radiate us....that is their job.  I can't expect anything else, I suppose.  

 PS  I have great respect for my doctors, and I feel their kind intentions, I like them as people, and I have to feel love for them, too.  They are a wonderful and very intelligent bunch, who DO want to help, but I am afraid they are too narrow-minded to take in the full concept of our illness.  Or maybe they are having their hands tied by the FDA, and the medical organizations they belong to.

I fear their lack of knowledge of ways to make my body balanced enough to conquer cancer.  I believe the body is very seriously out of balance and must be brought back in balance to become healthy again.  I believe that only the individual can make him or herself healthy again. Mostly, that involves chemo, surgery and radiation....but, I do not believe these are the first lines of attack.   

I know I am 'ranting' too much, but, please consider that there is much more involved treating our disease than treating the symptoms, we must treat the body as a whole to secure a lasting cure.  

You are welcome, impositive...and thanks.

(I do tend to get carried away on this subject.) 

I am no expert, but I am open to alternative information and have read the Breakthrough book.  It's funny to me that folks will accept whatever is put on TV as truth.  These shows are produced and most likely the producer has a slant on the topic that is conveyed.  Don't even get me started on main stream media news networks!!

Anyways, on her blog, Suzanne Somers posted letters written to her by the two doctors that were highlighted in the show about their response toward the piece.

http://www.suzannesomers.com/Blog/post/Dateline.aspx

http://www.suzannesomers.com/Blog/post/Dr-Nick-Gonzalez-e28093-Dateline-Response-to-KNOCKOUT-Alternative-Cancer-Treatment.aspx

I can't help but think Suzanne Somer's main goal is to sell books. I did standard treatment, and also eat an anti-inflammation diet, so I am open to whatever may help. But to cure cancer with diet? I can only think of a local mom who died recently of metastatic bc-she chose to treat her cancer with a macrobiotic diet only. At the end she tried chemo, but it was too late-very sad.

I don't take it that SS presents "another" point of view.  On listening to her for a while( over the past few Years), in her opinion, hers is the ONLY point of view and the rest of us are crazy sheep following the industrial medical complex that is taking us down a primrose path of bad health and most profoundly problematic: bad skin. 

Her use of estrogen was her holy grail in the beginning--esp. to enhance her sex life.  then it was to protect her skin, now she is touting hair analysis.  OK, a new book for each and every thought she has.  And again, she's laughing all the way to the bank.  I have no problem with people making money, but not to the detriment of those who are ill and want to believe that established treatment protocol is  not "good" for us and SS has all the ans. Geesh.

I used to like SS a lot.  Her book "Keeping Secrets", published years ago about growing up with an alcoholic dad, played a big part in changing my life.  I realized I too was an "Adult Child of and Alcoholic" --I was able to take steps and seek help that helped me heal from certain childhood traumas.

Now, tho, I think SS is using her cancer, or whatever illnesses she claims to have, to keep the media spotlight on her.  No one wants to see her bouncing around in a tank top and shorts any more, and the diet/exercise phase she went thru has run its course.  But she still likes the spotlight, and I just think the health issues, or illness issues, however you want to look at it, are a way she can get the media to pay attention to her.  

I also used to like Andrew Weil, read several of his books, but at one point he admited to using LSD and seemed to present it in a positive light and I just couldn't put any faith in his teachings after I read that. 

Peggy, why did you have chemo if you're so against it? Hmmmm? Just curious...

I didn't hear anyone berating SS for being rich.  I admire people that can draw in that kind of income - wish I could!! She is a beautiful woman and sincerely wants to help people. We get that. But she had conventional treatment before alternative. So did you. How does that make you or her any different from us?

Cimetidine I would read up on this before you take it as well as let your MD know. Yes it has been found useful for colorectal cancer treatment although not FDA approved (yet). It also has some interaction issue with some meds and may reduce their effectiveness. It also appears to enhance estrogen activity which might not be ideal for those of us who are hormone positive and do believe that removing estrogen is the correct course.

...and I don't think I am any different than anyone else on this site....we are all in a fight for our lives...and we need all the help we can get, from every side.  I am not pushing some crazy alternative medicine, but evidence-based treatments that are working, but are not allowed to be provided to us, because they are not "Standard of Care".

As for Cimetidine, I believe ALL treatments need to be used ONLY with the assistance of someone familiar with their use, and who knows why and when to use them.  I don't believe in self-medication.  My preference in a doctor is one who has all his medial credentials, as well as those of a nutritionist, a reseacher's mind, and the bravery to treat people's health status, and their symtoms (tumors) as needed.  I will never be convinced that treating the symptoms is the best treatment.  Coventional treatment counts on the body's ability to defeat the cancer, if you make through the "Standard of Care".

I firmly believe that diet is the number one thing that we can personally control...and even that should not be extreme, but balanced.  I also believe in supplements and coffee enemas...my first one was when I had a cold or flu....it really helped.  And so many of us are very toxic and this is just a detoxifying agent.  At first, I was repulsed by this suggestion from my very old and ancient doctor, but he had never given me bad advice, and it worked to my great surprise.  He was always one to try the most gentle methods of treatment before he offered drugs.  He was very wise and amazingly intelligent....I think he had seen everything.  I wish he were still alive. 

It's interesting to read that SS was estrogen receptor positive and that she did mistletoe treatment instead of chemotherapy. Mistletoe therapy is quite popular here in Europe so she certainly was not the first woman to do this. Although I think the reputable clinics offer it alongside chemo these days. I know my insurance would pay for something like that.



As for taking estrogen, that's quite a positive sign if it's true. That means whatever she did probably cured her. Estrogen blocking would still be beneficial if she hadn't been cured.

mistletoe treatment information is listed on the NCI.gov site:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/mistletoe/HealthProfessional/page3

I don't fine this unusual. Taxotere and Taxol (chemo) are from needles or bark of the European yew tree. 

See, that's what people don't realize....these "chemicals" do come from nature. So the concept of "natural" treatments could be as simple as saying that SS had a treatment with bark of the yew tree. We'd think it crazy....but Aspirin is bark from the birch (beech?) tree!!!! They all start SOMEWHERE!!

But, having said that, while my Dad was dying of lung cancer in a cancer centre in Toronto, there were posters plastered ALL over urging people to tell thier doctors EVERYTHING they were taking...the St. John's Wort for example as it interacts with chemo. Something natural doesn't mean GOOD all the time! There are a LOT of poisons out there.....

Peggy, your family member may rally at first with new treatment. Studies have shown some of it is psychological and some is just NUTRITION!! I've heard it many times that cancer patients don't die of cancer, they die of starvation. Remember, oncologist ONLY deal with cancer. Not the whole body. Their entire study is cancer and chemo. That's their job. They can't possibly be fluent in all areas of medicine.

So saying that nutrition is so important is VERY true. BUT, it's not a cause OR a cure!!

Iago,

Actually, Taxol and taxotere are not natural at all. They are synthesized in the lab to be a completely different molecule than the Yew tree. So please don't circulate the rumor that those chemo agents are "natural."  Anybody who has taken them will vouch for the difference between mistletoe and the toxic chemos.

Without the Yew Tree there would be no Taxol or Taxotere.The source is natural.

They have to do something to mistletoe to get it into a form of an extract. Everything seems to have some kind of synthesis unless you are eating right off the tree.

One shouldn't accuse someone of spreading rumors when they don't agree with them. It makes them look like a mean girl.