The Cancer Revolution, Part 2

Alternatives in Cancer Therapy
by Ross Pelton, R.Ph., Ph.D.

(Page 2 of 2)

The Cancer "Cure"

Patients have another question that gets to the heart of the matter: "Can you cure me?" I respond by discussing the real meaning of the word cure. Even if the patient has no sign of cancer, it is incorrect to claim a cure, because there is always the possibility of a recurrence. It is more appropriate to use the words prevention and remission. We want to increase patient health so that the body is strong enough to prevent any recurrences.

By concentrating on attacking disease, we fail to place proper emphasis on prevention and healthy living. Currently in the United States 14 percent of the GNP is spent on health care, and a significant percentage of that money is spent in the last thirty days of life in a desperate, but futile, attempt to prolong life.

What Is Alternative Cancer Therapy?

Alternative cancer therapy is a broad term that covers many different therapeutic approaches. In the United States the term refers to any cancer treatment that is not approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Some of the practitioners offering alternative therapies are medical doctors, while others are not. Often treatment is delivered in a clinical setting. A few of these clinics are located in the United States, but most are in Mexico, Japan, the Philippines, and various countries in Europe.

Some clinics have a specific focus and emphasize the therapy they are famous for. Other clinics use a multidimensional approach, with a wide variety of alternative therapies, such as detoxification, immune-system enhancement, nutritional support, healthy diets, and bio-magnetic therapy, along with such biological substances as hydrogen peroxide, ozone, laetrile, shark cartilage, and many others, which are covered in this book.

Testing and Documenting Alternative Therapies

The main criticism that the medical establishment has of alternative cancer treatments is a lack of traditional scientific testing and documentation. One reason for the absence of mainstream research on alternatives is that the funding institutions that dole out the money for cancer research do not support research into alternative cancer therapies.

This situation creates a double bind for alternative therapies. They are criticized for not having adequate research to document their effectiveness, yet funding is not made available for studies.

Drug companies, which fund many of the studies for new drugs, have little interest in pursuing alternative treatments, since they are generally inexpensive and cannot be patented. For example, there is no money to be made from spending millions of dollars on research to show that vitamin C helps to fight cancer, since anyone can buy the substance at the corner drugstore.

Treatments like psychotherapy, visualization, and support groups receive little funding for research because they are not drugs, and the traditional medical community tends to be suspicious of anything that identifies a mental aspect to a disease.

The Quest for the Magic Bullet

Another reason for the lack of research into alternative cancer therapies is that many are offered as part of an integrated program. For example, the National Cancer Institute's laetrile study produced negative results. However, proponents of laetrile point out that the NCI study ignored diet, nutritional supplements, and other substances that are synergistically involved in producing laetrile's positive effects. (5)

Cancer, like heart disease, is a multidimensional disease. It is nearly impossible to study the effects of diet, therapeutic agents, and other influences in the traditional research framework. Investigating several variables calls for dozens of experiments and impossible amounts of research funding.

The traditional experimental approach calls for checking one substance at a time, and this leads to a search for a "magic bullet" to cure cancer. However, the very nature of this traditional research method ignores the multidimensional nature of the disease. What we need is new ways to evaluate the effectiveness of alternative cancer therapies.

In 1987 I helped to conduct a study at the Gerson Institute, which was designed to document and verify the long-term survival of patients following the Gerson therapy. This study was a best-case review, which is referenced in the OTA report to Congress with the suggestion that best-case studies might be a way of broadening the information base for unconventional cancer treatments.

Complementary Medicine

This book's focus on alternative cancer therapies is not meant to imply a rejection of traditional chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation. Alternative therapies can be used alone, but frequently the best approach is to use them in conjunction with traditional therapies.

Robert Atkins, M.D., first became famous for his book Dr. Atkins' Diet Revolution. He began his career as a traditional medical practitioner, but his practice now draws on both orthodox medicine and alternative medicine in a blend that he calls complementary medicine.

In his new book, Dr. Atkins' Health Revolution, he says, "I can never go back to practicing orthodox medicine. I know it is too limited; there are too many areas it cannot enter. There are too many people it cannot help. Orthodox medicine is not to be discarded; it is simply to be added to. Once a physician knows what the additions can do, his ethics will not allow him to withhold them." (1)

Dr. Atkins treats cancer with "kitchen sink complementarism," which means using everything that he can think of in the way of health enhancers, immune stimulants, and enabling agents. He states, "The more alternative treatments I and my team of doctors had to draw on, the more were the successes of our patients." (1) But it isn't possible to make intelligent choices in cancer therapy without having the best available information on all approaches — including alternative therapies.

The Revolution in Cancer Therapy

This book describes the various ways alternative therapies are used, the theoretical explanations of their effect on cancer, and the available evidence on their effectiveness. These "treatment portraits" contain descriptive information, theoretical discussions, test reports, and case histories of exceptional patients. However, this is not the same as scientific double-blind research studies.

Practitioners offering alternative cancer therapies generally oppose double-blind studies because they regard it as immoral to give half the patients inactive sugar pills or distilled water injections when these people are in desperate need of real help.

Many people both outside and within the cancer industry are now admitting that the war on cancer has turned into what former FDA administrator Donald Kennedy called "a medical Vietnam," with very little progress to show for all the money and effort expended. (5) Now over half a million people die from cancer every year. That means that one person dies of cancer every sixty-four seconds, and over 1,350 people die each day. Even though the money and the people who control the cancer industry would like to convince the public to believe otherwise, many think these statistics indicate that the current methods of treating cancer have failed.

The current crisis in cancer therapy is crying out for new solutions. Many people feel that some of those new solutions are already available, and they are currently labeled as the alternative or unconventional cancer therapies.

Cancer patients have formed support groups and political action groups in an effort to fight for the availability of these alternative cancer therapies in the United States. There is a call for new directions and new solutions in cancer therapy and treatment.

We do not need new versions of what has come before. We have spent thirty years looking for better chemotherapeutic drugs; stronger, more focused radiation; and better surgical techniques. We do not need more of the same, or even better of the same. What we need is bold new ideas and directions.

More and more people are coming to believe that banning the nontoxic alternative cancer therapies in this country is a violation of freedom of choice, and that these nontoxic treatments should be readily available as an option to doctors and cancer patients. Some of the alternative cancer therapies are now legally available from foreign mail-order companies. It is the express purpose of this book to publicize these alternative therapies, and to make known the fact that they can be used legally, even if they have to be ordered from abroad.

Each chapter will explore the background of a particular alternative cancer therapy. The originators of these therapies are dedicated healers who often have fascinating personalities and dramatic lives. The background section is followed by a review of relevant clinical studies and case histories. Some alternative therapies have been scientifically evaluated more thoroughly than others. Each chapter will then conclude with a review of side effects and information on current dosage and administration practices. I sincerely hope that the information on alternative cancer therapies contained here will provide hope for patients as they search for new directions and solutions to the cancer crisis.

Notice

This book is designed to give the reader information about current alternative practices and therapies for cancer. It does not recommend any specific therapy, and the information contained herein should not be construed as such a recommendation. Any person desiring to pursue an alternative course of therapy for cancer or any disease should do so only under the care and supervision of a competent physician.

Copyright © 1994 by Ross Pelton, R. Ph., Ph.D.

About the Author

Ross Pelton, R.Ph., Ph.D., is a pharmacist, a nutritionist, and a health educator. He graduated from the University of Wisconsin in 1966 with a degree in Pharmacy and in 1984, he received his Ph.D. in Psychology and Holistic Health from The University for Humanistic Studies in San Diego, California.