Someone brought this up in GD:

[lildreamer316]

..so I figured I should post it here:

http://www.infusionclinic.com/

alternative therapy for cancer. I know we've discussed this method before here.
The poster said her doctor said they knew it worked but will not use it.
Just another nail in the coffin of industry-supported info!


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x357508#358642

[eilen]

1. I don't know about this.

I am not willing to reject it out of hand but the fact is that cancer is really an umbrella term for a number of different diseases that have some things in common. I have worked in oncology/hematology for a number of years and I would have some questions in regard to this treatment.

Barring the possibility that you may be feeding your tumor with lots of nutrients in this manner (tumors grow themselves blood vessels to nourish themselves and grow); I could see this as a possible way to avoid anorexia and support the body through treatment. I don't see how an iv nutrition can avoid the liver. Certainly iv medication is not avoided by the liver. That doesn't really make any sense to me. I will return to your link and read it more completely.

The only treatment that I am aware that has a very good chance of curing or at least stopping a cancer would be perhaps to have individual monoclonal antibodies developed or tailored to a patient's specific genetics. This method is cost prohibitive at this time but may perhaps be the way treatment will lead in the future. Much of the course of treatment also depends upon the stage of cancer when diagnosed.

ETA: Cancer treatment centers of America are conducting a Phase 1 study of treatment of cancer with IV high dose Vitamin C. This study is not completed (it ends in 8/2009)

and here are links to other studies in treatment of cancer and other blood dyscrasias. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?intr=%22Ascorbic+Acid%22>

There seems to be great interest in research for this therapy for patients post bone marrow or stem cell transplant, particularly multiple myeloma patients. They seem to be studying it in terms of combination therapy with biotherapies/monoclonals and some cytoxoic medications. Some of these studies appear to be going into Phase 2. Most of these studies are limited to patients who's disease has so far been resistant to traditional therapies. This is a requirement of phase 1 trials and after working in the field you should be happy to know that people are very willing to join a study protocol, even when they are informed that it may have little likliehood of helping them. It is often an altruistic act that is not recognized, a silent generous legacy for future patients with their diagnosis.

As such, I think it wise to see how these studies pan out before just going to an infusion clinic in Mexcio and getting this as a monotherapy.

I realize that insurance and ability to pay for therapy is a big issue. I have no answers for this. Some state and university hospitals will treat without insurance but you are not always getting the latest and greatest treatment protocol as the drugs are very expensive-- this depends often on the state you are in. Sometimes your best bet is to get into a study and have it financed by the university or the government. My advice would be to see a doctor who is associated with a research facility and that way, they would be more likely to hook you up with a study, if they don't have one in their facility, they know about others and can refer you. I am lucky to have worked in NY, their ability to assist people with limited funds seem better than some of the other states however, I am sure they could do better and perhaps some other states do better, I am not in the position to know which one is the best. I just know I saw more people in Tennessee go without treatment due to the unstable nature of their state healthcare program in the past five years. Many people were dropped and then had to stop chemotherapy treatments until they could get waivers and became covered again. It is very sad.

I urge people to continue to insist on a single payor system. Most cancers are found in people between the ages of 30-55, well before the medicare age. Even medicare with supplemental is not always sufficient for people. If you are ever so unfortunate to become diagnosed with cancer, please research the standards of care in Europe. They have, by necessity, due to the nature of single payor -- developed protocols that start with the lesser expensive adjuvant and supportive medications first before prescribing the more expensive. For example, starting with an oral medication for pain rather than a fentanyl patch. Using a generic anti-nausea medication before kytril.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

2. I know of another experimental treatment

It involves taking digestive enzymes on an empty stomach. The enzymes enter the bloodstream and digest the protective coating that covers cancer cells, thereby making them "visible" to the white blood cells of the immune system, which can latch onto them and destroy them.

My husband had a liver test that showed some abnormalities that were possible pre-cancerous. He went on this therapy, and when he took a follow up test a few months later, the abnormalities were gone.

The MD using this doesn't talk about it, because it is true that Big Pharma would shut her down--they don't want a cure, you see--no profit in it.