Alternative Treatment

Maud, thanks. I have no idea how many people die directly from treatments. That would be an  interesting to know. I miss Tucker too. I hope nothing is wrong and she's just on vacation.   

Attribution of Deaths Following Cancer Treatment

"Welch and Black (4) raise the concern that cancer death rates are systematically underestimated, in that many patients who die as a result of cancer treatment do not have cancer recorded as the underlying cause of death.

The authors assembled data on the reported cause of death for all patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)1 program from 1994 through 1998 who died within 1 month of cancer-directed surgery for one of 19 common solid tumors. They found that for 41% of these deaths, the cause was not attributed to cancer. The authors speculate that cancer treatment is the probable underlying cause for essentially all of these deaths and, as a result, the cancer mortality rate is underestimated by 0.9%.

Welch and Black (4) also suggest that many deaths subsequent to 1 month after cancer-directed surgery may be similarly miscoded, leading to further underestimation.  

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/94/14/1044.full 

From livestrong.com/article/70454

A secondary tumor is the formation of a new and unrelated cancer as a result of the treatment of another cancer.  The secondary cancer usually arises months, or even years after the initial treatment chemotherapy and radiation are known carcinogens meaning they can cause cancer.

Kaara, thanks for reporting your themography results.......congratulations!

Good luck!  It was a good decision for me... let's hope it works for you too!

a feiend posted a quote from charles darwin of fb:  the survivors are not the most strong, or the most intelligent, they're the ones most easily adapted to change

Hi Abigail ! glad to see you back with us 

Please, tell us about your trouble 

Hi Abigail, I hope you enjoyed your time at the studio.  I'm afraid I know little about chemotherapy other than the ones they wanted me to use.  The one you mentioned sounds like one they use for stage IV.  I had 2 of the 3 rounds of FEC (5-fluoruorocil, epirubicin, cyclophosphamide.. spelling?..) before dropping out.  I refused the Docetaxel as I doubt it helps with my type of slow growing BC according to my research.  But you needn't even think about chemo as you may not need it.

It you have broken skin then you may get an infection soon.  That's what happened to the woman in the thread I sent you a link to.  I think this would mean they can't operate for fear of spreading the infection.  That's why it's better for us to get the surgery as soon as we find a lump, before complications set in.   I feel so sad for your situation and I really hope with all my heart that it's some other health problem, not cancer.  Please keep the area as clean as you can and cover it with something sterile.  Ask at your pharmacy for dressing for an open wound and change it every day. 

Other than that, I guess the pain will eventually cause you to see a Dr or emergency help so there's no point in me pressing the point. Please take care and know we are all here for you.

CANCER patients are offering themselves as human guinea pigs as researchers investigate a possible cure for cancer that was found in north Queensland rainforests.

Scientists have identified a compound in the fruit of the native blushwood shrub that appears to "liquefy and destroy cancer with no side-effects", according to latest research.

Found deep in the remnants of a 130 million-year-old rainforest, the fruit extract may yet hold the secret antidote to Australia's No.1 killer disease.

Victoria Gordon, of EcoBiotics, an Atherton Tableland-based company, said they hoped to go to human clinical trials later this year.

Dr Gordon said a single dose injection of the extract, known as EBC-46, had been effective in 50 critically ill dogs and about a dozen cats and horses.

"This is proving to be something exceptional," she said."The tumour literally liquefies.

"There is a rapid knock-down of the tumour, it disintegrates within 24 hours and we have a rapid healing response.

"The biggest tumour we treated was the size of a Coke can in a dog, and that animal is fully healed and healthy."

Dr Gordon said it had worked on skin cancers, such as carcinomas and melanomas, and bone cancer, and was a possible treatment for breast, colon and prostate cancer."

http://newcures.info/category/cancers/ 

what's the name of the plant, joy?

Abigail, it's a compound in the fruit of the native blushwood shrub (only to be found in Australia) and looks like this:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/possible-cancer-cure-found-in-blushwood-shrub/story-e6freoof-1225826874057 

Geeze, I don't know what they're waiting for !!!! I'm sure eating the fruit helps tremendously, why can't we find it North America ????

This is not an edible plant and may work by simply corroding the tissue. It sounds like their publicity was designed to get shareholders money.  I found this letter on a pet forum:

A new cancer treatment in animals (EBC-46) derived from a North QLD rain forest tree was originally promoted in tv programs in Oct 2009 and then again in June 2010 (although no scientific data has been released during that time)

No data regarding this compound has be published in the scientific literature at any time. THe information that the company Ecobiotics (via their subsidiary Qbiotis) has posted on their website claims of efficacy in treating cancers in mice, horses, dogs and cats with only minimal discomfort. The mechanism of action of cancer killing is not clear, but is postulated that direct injection into the tumour may stimulate neutriphils to eradicate cancer. The anecdotal descriptions we have heard from veterinarians that have used EBC-46 vary and include necrosis of the tumor creating and open wound sometimes accompanied by significant pain, and often followed by regrowth of the tumour from the periphery, this implies corrosive activity rather than a specific anticancer mechanism.

although Ecobiotics claims cancer cures in patients with otherwise unmanageable cancer, there is little long-term follow up, little clear information regarding the pets disease status or previous treatments tried, and toxicity has not apparently been assessed in any cohesive manner. the Qbiotics website states there has been a "lack of significant effects or adverse events". However we know of at least one dog with a live tumour that was treated in November 2009 with EBC-46 (under direction from Ecobiotics). although the amount of the drug was less than the recommended dose, the patient died during the injection and could not be revived. This event has not been reported by Ecobiotics in their most recent media release or through their website, although they now list liver cancers as one of the sites to avoid treatment. This case and several other patients we know of with marked toxicity that was reported to Qbiotics, casts not doubt as to the completeness of the company's reporting. The CEO of Ecobiotics was contacted to see if we could help with a properly desigtned clinical trial but this offer was refused.

Whenever a "cure for cancer" arises it raises flags. We feel it is appropriate for veterinarians as highly trained professionals whose first concern is the well-being of our patients and all animals with cancer, to be wary when a research group wants to treat patients without a significant body of toxicity data, and chooses to announce trial "results" in the lay press rather than through the scientific literature. Marketing directly through the lay media is of concern, as we feel it takes advantage of worried pet owners fears and hopes. in addition, there appears to be an effort to avoid the same level of scrutiny just because the patients are animals and not humans. This is doing injustice to the veterinary profession as well as to the pets we care for. Finally there is an implication that current "traditional" cancer treatment is ineffective and associated with unacceptable side effects. Veterinary oncology is currently practices with the highest regard for quality of life, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy are all tailored to ensure these treatments are effective and yet provided with minimal side effects in the vast majority of patients. the animals treated with EBC-46 have, according to the Qbiotics website and media releases, been pets that have "untreatable diseases". Some of the patients we know of (including those shown on the website) certainly had the potential to respond to, and in some cases had the potential for cure with, established therapies such as surgery, radiation therapy or chemotherapy.

PLant derived materials do have potential for cancer treatment; in fact some of the most effective and well-established chemotherapy drugs used in veterinary (as well as human) oncology are derived from plants. However, enormous amounts of careful research and evaluation needs to be done before efficacy can be established. Since the USA National Cancer Institute initiated a screening program for plant-derived antitumour agents in the 1960's, more than 100,000 compounds have been screened but only seven plant derived anticancer drugs have received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for clinical application.

A critical part of the necessary evaluation of a new drug is a carefully designed clinical trial. A rigorous clinical trial is the only way to provide the evidence of safety and efficacy which is required by regulatory authorities for the approval of drugs, and should withstand the process of peer-reviewed for publication in veterinary and medical journals. Treating individual cases without the framework of an appropriate study design can contribute useful early information but it constitutes a pilot study, not a clinical trial. For example, the American Cancer Society evaluates cancer treatment methods by asking three questions:

1) Has the treatment been objectively demonstrated in the peer-reviewed scientific literature to be effective?
2) Has the treatment shown potential for benefit that clearly exceeds the potential for harm?
3) Have objective studies been correctly conducted under appropriate peer review to answer these questions?

Our concern regarding EBC-46 is shared by the Cancer Council of Australia. In June 2010, this group sounded a note of caution on the media releases, saying the company had not yet published its research.
"We have yet to see the results of this research published in a significant journal, where they would be subject ti independent scientific scrutiny, which is useful determining the rigour of the research,"chief executive Ian Olver said in a statement. "...it is far too early to be able to class this as a breakthrough."

EBC-46 has not undergone the testing and scrutiny for saftey and efficacy that is required to enter clinical veterinary practice. Until such time as controlled clinical trials can be performed that ensure that pets are not likely to be harmed by this treatment, we cannot endorse this product. The undersigned veterinarians have had extensive experience in designing and performing clinical trials, both in Australia and overseas, and we strongly urge our fellow veterinarians to wait for complete evaluation of any compound before recommending it for their patients.

Signed Anthony Moore : BV SC, MV Sc: (Oncology) Adjunct Professor, University of Sydney, Director Veterinary Oncology Consultants

Angela Frimberger V MD (Oncology) Adjunct Senior Lecturer, University of Sydney, Director Veterinary Oncology Consultants.

Rodney Straw BV Sc - Specialist small animal surgeon (oncology), Director of Brisbane Veterinary Specialist Centre, Executive Director of The Australian Animal Cancer Foundation.

Peter Bennett BV Sc (Oncology and Internal Medicine) - Specialist in Veterinary Oncology and Small Animal Internal Medicine - Director Melbourne Veterinary Cancer Care, Senior Fellow Univeristy of Melbourne Adjunct Senior Lecturer Massey University.

Valerie Poirier DV M, (Oncology and Radiation Oncology) Specialist in Veterinary Oncology

Peter Best BV Sc - Specialist in Veterinary Anaesthesia

After a lengthy discussion at our vet practice, until more work is done on this we are not recommending it to anyone... not one of our staff would even contemplate using this in our own animals, let alone recommending it to the general public.

I won't give up HOPE 

All-Natural "Killer" Targets Cancer

There's good news on the cancer front. An all-natural flower extract kills cancer cells without harmful side effects.

The news comes from Professor Laurence Patterson. He's the director of the UK Institute for Cancer Therapeutics (ICT). He also leads cancer research for the University of Bradford in England.

"Many agents used in the treatment of cancer are poisons," he says. "Chemotherapy can be the death of a patient."

But this new flower extract treatment is different. It targets cancer cells while leaving healthy cells unharmed. And it works for many types of cancer.

"It's a new treatment that could be effective against pretty much all types of tumor," he says. "And it will not cause damage to normal tissue."

Other cancer experts are supporting his findings, which are published in the journal Cancer Research.

"This new approach targets tumor blood vessels that cancers need for growth," says Dr. Paul Workman, who leads the cancer research department for the University of London.

http://naturalhealthdossier.com/ 

Kaara: if BigPharma stands in the way of saving our lives, they are killers.

I'm hopeful because this is in Europe...wonder if pharma is Big over there