Going to get a biospy soon to see that is happening with the remaining tumor. SUVmax rating of 6.0 is in the grey area of whether it is malignant of not.
Here is a clinic in Indiana doing something different:
Welcome to ICAM | Body-Friendly Integrated Cancer Treatment
PolyMVA Survivors: Interesting data about Chemotherapy Doctors don't tell you
Ralph Moss, PhD, former Director of Information for Sloan Kettering Cancer Research Center
Question: "How in the world, Dr Moss, can [chemotherapy] be considered a standard cure, when it works for 2-4 [percent of cancer patients], and very specific ones?
Answer: We are dealing with an industry. It is not supported by the facts. The way that it is done is this. The drugs are tested in test tubes, and they look for things that will kill cells. After you have found something that kills cells, cancer cells, cell lines which are very abnormal non-typical sort of growths, maybe a new life form almost, then you put it into animals. Then if it kills the cancers before it kills the animals, and shrinks the tumours, you consider you have an active agent.
You then put it into people, and go through the 3 phases the FDA prescribes for this, and basically if you can shrink the tumour 50% or more for 28 days you have got the FDA's definition of an active drug. That is called a response rate, so you have a response. Quite a bit [different from a cure] because when you look to see if there is any life prolongation from taking this treatment what you find is all kinds of hocus pocus and song and dance about the disease free survival, and this and that. In the end there is no proof that chemotherapy in the vast majority of cases actually extends life, and this is the GREAT LIE about chemotherapy, that somehow there is a correlation between shrinking a tumour and extending the life of the patient. [Or that there is a correlation between looking at a cancer cell in a test tube and the tumour in someone's body.]
What happens as you grow those cells in cell lines they become very weird. Hundreds and hundreds of generations later they don't even look like normal human cancer cells. They are things that grow under glass, immortal cells, unlike normal cancer cells. So much cancer research is very questionable because it is based on this cell line research. Click here for MORE
The FDA's Cozy Little Relationship: The Politics behind finding Cures
Relationships between the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry have led to a ?revolving door,? in which pharmaceutical executives go to work for the FDA, making regulatory decisions on matters affecting their industry and sometimes even their own former companies. When their time at the FDA is over, they go back to higher-paying jobs in the industry
A web search for ?FDA revolving door? turns up numerous examples, but it?s no longer necessary even to go to the trouble. The revolving door was formalized in 2001, with the creation of the Food and Drug Administration Alumni Association (FDAAA)
The FDAAA?s web site says the group is ?a non-profit, non-lobbying organization dedicated to serving those who have supported the consumer protection mission of the U.S. FDA.? Oddly, however, pharmaceutical industry lobbyists and p.r. people are well represented on its board of directors
Among the FDAAA's goals are to ?enable former colleagues to stay current on major scientific and regulatory issues facing FDA, educate the public about the vital work of the FDA . . . ,? and ?assist FDA in recruiting alumni with specialized expertise and institutional knowledge during critical situations.? The web site also says that the FDAAA?s ?core mission is to help alumni stay in touch with the issues of the day facing FDA and support the Agency?s public health mission through expertise-sharing, training and outreach opportunities.? Click here for MORE
Cancer Network: Live Viruses in Cancer Treatment - (THIS is part of what I have been studying & looking into. This is just the TIP of the iceberg. The MD I am working with has been utilizing this model.)
John Nemunaitis, MD
Associate Director, Clinical Research Disease Committee Chairman, Gene/Cellular/Special Therapies, Medical Director, Mary Crowley Medical Clinic Research Center, Director, TOPA Research, US Oncology, Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
November 1, 2002
This article explores the principles of viral therapy for cancer and the past several decades of investigations with viruses such as Egypt 101, mumps, Newcastle disease, influenza, vaccinia, herpes simplex, and adenovirus serotype 5.
Most people think of "viral therapy" as an obscure, experimental approach to the treatment of disease. However, replicating viruses have been used as an effective therapeutic modality for more than 200 years. One of the greatest clinical advances in medical history?the eradication of smallpox?was made with a replicating virus. In 1796, Edward Jenner discovered that pus from the wounds of infected patients contained live cowpox virus, which could be used as an effective vaccine against smallpox. This discovery lead to the vaccination of several million people and world clearance of the disease.
Although antitumor activity and a low toxicity profile have been demonstrated for several oncolytic viruses, the development of viral therapy in cancer treatment has been limited by a lack of definitive phase III trials. The use of replicating viruses to potentiate the efficacy of standard cancer therapies also awaits conclusive clinical testing. Based on preliminary results with new generations of oncolytic viruses, ongoing research in this area appears encouraging.
Interestingly, rare reports of complete remission induced in cancer patients in association with smallpox vaccination were sporadically reported. Observations of tumor regression in association with other viral infections have also been described in cancer patients infected with herpes zoster, hepatitis virus, influenza, varicella, measles, and other viruses. The first published report of tumor destruction related to replication competent viruses occurred in 1912 when a woman with cervical cancer developed significant tumor necrosis following administration of an attenuated rabies virus for prophylactic treatment after a dog bite. Early in vitro demonstration of viral oncolysis was first shown in 1922 with vaccinia virus, which was shown to propagate in several malignant tumor lines.
Following these observations, extensive work was performed investigating the potential use of viral therapy to treat cancer. In 1950, a strain of encephalitis virus was shown to induce a dose-related oncolytic effect in vivo with a mouse sarcoma tumor. Viral replication was shown to correlate with tumor cell lysis; however, viral encephalitis developed in several mice. It was later found that serial passaging of the encephalitis virus in vitro prior to tumor injection in vivo would reduce the proliferative capacity in normal tissues, thereby minimizing the occurrence of encephalitis and enhancing oncolytic capacity. Clinical investigation was stimulated following additional work with Newcastle disease virus (NDV), influenza virus, and other viruses in animal models that showed cessation of ascites tumor (Ehrlich cells) growth and eradication of the malignancy in some animals.
Clinical trials were carried out in advanced cancer patients between 1950 and the early 1970s, investigating administration of replication-proficient viruses. Transient responses were seen. Several mechanisms of action were described, involving direct tumor lysis related to viral proliferation, tumor antigen induced immune activation, modulation of cancer oncogene expression, apoptosis related to expression of unique viral proteins, release of immuno-stimulatory small cell-signaling protein molecules, and activation of other anti-tumor immune responses (ie, natural killer [NK] cell activation). Viruses with low pathogenicity for normal tissue and high oncolytic capacity were investigated. Such viruses include NDV, mumps virus, herpes simplex virus (HSV), Egypt 101 virus, influenza virus, adenovirus serotype 5, vaccinia, and ONYX-015. Historical and current studies will be discussed.
Of the 90 patients, 65 received a combination of local intratumoral injection and/or intravenous infusion of the virus, and 24 (37%) of these 65 patients showed a partial or complete response. Most partial or complete responses occurred in patients with gastric carcinoma. However, the highest proportion of complete or partial responses occurred in cutaneous carcinoma and uterine carcinoma. Additionally, 9 of 10 patients with metastatic pulmonary carcinoma achieved clinical improvement with regression in tumor bulk. Click here for MORE: Free Registration required
Kr, thanks for the informitive posts. My wife was an Oncology Nurse for 8 years and swears by chemo. I am and always have been skeptical of the entire medical field. My wife and daughter go to the doctor every time they feel a little sick. I know that the reason their immune system isn't what it should be is because their immune system isn't given a chance to function and take care of things on it's own. They just take pills and are now in need of pills for everything. And the doctors and big pharma keeps making money!
I don't agree with a lot of "conspiracy theory" things that you believe, but I am in total agreement with everything you say about the medical/drug field.
There are actually only a very small handful of things that chemo works upon HOWEVER the question again is how long will the cancer stay away? The statistics belie the PR on it.
Thanks for the acknowledgment. You should have her read that study I posted about the viral therapy.
THIS is not light reading but you can see by looking at this that this is a different approach to handling the body & it is proving to be effective, as I can now attest. If you read his story you can see he was light year's ahead of his time. Then his lecture transcript.
Induced Remission Therapy - Our Best Hope Against Cancer? Part One
Dr Sam Chachoua has developed a safe, effective vaccine for healing cancer, AIDS and other terminal illnesses. Chachoua has identified ?nemesis organisms? that can control and even cure diseases such as cancer and AIDS, but medical authorities continue to ignore his work and try to prevent his treatments from becoming widely known.
Induced Remission Therapy - Our Best Hope Against Cancer? Part Two
Here we present an edited transcript of the lecture Chachoua gave at the 2nd World Congress on Cancer, held in September 1995.
The next articles are therapies that have started to utilize his breakthroughs.
Live Viruses in Cancer Therapy ( I posted above)
WikiGenes - PPIB - peptidylprolyl isomerase B (cyclophilin B)
Application of using enzymes in fighting lung cancer
SpringerLink - Clinical Rheumatology, Volume 26, Number 5
Use of chicken pox virus in fighting arthritis
Wall Street Journal - Doctor, a Mutation and a Potential Cure for AIDS
Using mutated cells from a donor to fight cancer & AIDS
Last edited by kr1963; 05-17-2011 at 03:11 AM.
Thanks WG! My ENT doesn't take Medicaid. I have to find one who does unfortunately! Hopefully soon.
Just my opinion. doctors like you present here are portrayed as "quacks" because the oncologists and pharmaceutical companies do not want the cure for cancer and many other diseases to get out. If these cures did get out, they could not make so much money as they do treating them and retreating them.
BRUTUS BUCKEYE WILL TAKE YOU DOWN...