Alternatives & Traditional

Posts tagged ‘lactic’

The Stomach Acid is a Waste Product Myth

I have seen a number of people erroneously claiming stomach acid is not necessary to the body and is in fact a dangerous byproduct in the body.  The myth was traced back to a Dr. Young. An article promoting this myth is found on his FaceBook page: .

This article is addressing the various myths being promoted by Dr. Young and will explain the importance of stomach acid in the body.

Let’s start with the claim that the stomach does not digest food. Digestion starts in the mouth and continues in the stomach and throughout most of the intestine. Therefore, I am not really sure what he means by the stomach not digesting food. If that is the case then wouldn’t the same apply to the mouth and intestines since enzymes are working in all these areas to digest the food? So where does Dr. Young think digestion takes place if at all?

As for his claims about the stomach alkalizing food this just further backs my belief that Dr. Young DOES NOT understand human physiology. Alkalizing of the chyme occurs in the duodenum, not the stomach.

When we ingest food or liquids stomach acid is released for a variety of reasons.:

-Stomach acid is needed to kill ingested pathogens.

-Stomach acid is needed to acidify certain nutrients such as minerals and the vitamins B6, B12 and folate for absorption. These B vitamins are required for methylation, which is essential for about 4,000 processes in the body including the production of more stomach acid.

Methylation is also required to prevent cancer, reduce the risk of heart disease, build up neurotransmitters and hormones, support energy levels and the immune system, for cartilage synthesis, etc.

And a lack of stomach acid decreases the conversion of silica in to orthosilicic acid (OA). Declining stomach acid leads to decreases in OA, which in turn leads to many of the conditions associated with aging such as osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, emphysema, diverticulitis, wrinkles, etc.

-Stomach acid is required for the protein digestive enzyme pepsin to function. Without sufficient stomach acid the proteins fail to break down properly leaving protein solutes that can trigger off immune reactions.

I have a write up on the benefits of stomach acid here:

The chyme, which is a mixture of food or ingested liquids, stomach acid and enzymes is made acidic by the stomach acid for the above reasons. The chyme is then released in to the duodenum where pancreatic bicarbonate is released to neutralize the acids in the chyme. The duodenum IS NOT the stomach. The stomach only releases bicarbonate after digestion in the stomach is finished to neutralize whatever acid is left in the stomach since the stomach does not maintain a protective barrier 24 hours a day.

What really get me is how Dr. Young claims hydrochloric acid is a waste product when it is essential for many things in the body.

And he is wrong on most of what he claims the hydrochloric acid causes. Stomach acid DOES NOT cause indigestion nor reflux. A lack of stomach acid can cause these, which is why things that increase stomach acidity such as bitters, betaine HCl or vinegar are used to treat these conditions. See:

Excessive stomach acid (hyperchlorhydria) is actually so rare that it is almost unheard of. Especially since stomach acid levels naturally decline with age and most people are acid deficient after the age of 40.

It was once thought that excess stomach acid was a cause of stomach ulcers. That myth was disproven decades ago!!!!!

Stomach acid only causes stomach ulcers when the stomach’s protective lining is not there to protect the stomach, such as when nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used such as aspirin, ibuprofen (Advil, Motrin, Nuprin, etc), celecoxib (Celebrex), naproxen (Naprosyn), etc. These drugs inhibit hormones known as prostaglandins. Most people familiar with these hormones know that some are associated with inflammation since they dilate blood vessels, which can lead to leakage. But these hormones are also required for the production of the stomach’s protective lining.

If Dr. Young understood ulcer formation he would also know that the most common cause of ulcers is the bacteria Helicobacter pylori, which secretes highly alkaline and toxic ammonia to neutralize the stomach acid that would otherwise kill the bacteria.

Helicobacter pylori is also a primary cause of stomach cancer. Stomach cancer risk has been found to have a direct correlation to low or absent stomach acid, which is contrary to Dr, Young’s claim.

His claims in number 5 are simply laughable!!!!!

Apparently Dr. Young is also unaware of the fact that stomach acid is released with the ingestion of any food or liquid. Even the though of food can stimulate stomach acid release. This DOES NOT occur only with animal protein sources as he implies.

Then there is his contradiction. He claims earlier that the bicarbonate and the acid are produced in equal parts. But then he claims that as the stomach acid is released the bicarbonate is released in to the stomach to neutralize the acid thus inducing alkalosis and using up the alkaline reserves. First of all none of this is true. Then he continues with claiming the hydrochloric acid is taken up by the blood lowering the plasma pH, which is also complete nonsense. If that really happened we would all be dead. So how does he explain the alkaline reserves being depleted while there is still an excess of acid supposedly entering the bloodstream if they were produced equally? Using some common sense should tell him that if these two compounds are formed in equal amounts then this would also mean that the depletion of sodium bicarbonate would also mean a complete depletion of the stomach acid. In other words, if the salt forms one unit of bicarbonate and one unit of hydrochloric acid and one unit of bicarbonate will neutralize one unit of hydrochloric acid that would mean that a depletion of the bicarbonate reserves would mean a complete neutralization of ALL the stomach acid. In fact, this does not even take in to account the compounds in our diet that will neutralize the stomach acid such as carbonates, alkaloids, etc. in the diet that all neutralize acid. Therefore, the stomach acid would be depleted long before the bicarbonate. So where is all this hydrochloric acid coming from that is supposedly entering the bloodstream according to his bogus claims?

If Dr. Young really understood human physiology then he would also know that acid buffering bicarbonate is released in to the blood by parietal cells during stomach acid secretion leading to ALKALINITY of the blood, not acidosis as he claims. He should research the “alkaline tide”. Alkalizing bicarbonate is also produce in the blood. So again, how is acidosis occurring when stomach acid never enters the blood and even if it did the acid would be neutralized by the bicarbonate and the body’s pH would still be maintained through respiration and kidney function?

In fact, it is not the acid that is the danger as he claims, it is the base that has to be dealt with. See:

Then Dr Young refers to the Pishinger’s space as an “organ” when it is not an organ. A space is not an organ. Furthermore, if you look up Pishinger’s space the only sites that come up are the ones repeating his claims.

Dr. Young also refers to the acids from cells as waste again when in fact they are required for our health and existence.

Then Dr. Young claims there is no mention of any organs that store acids from metabolism and diet. So what? There is no reason to store these acids since they are utilized by the immediately. For example, we produce carbonic acid continually, which serves numerous purposes such as to buffer highly alkaline and highly toxic ammonia, to maintain circulation, to allow oxygen release from hemoglobin, to form more stomach acid for proper digestion and absorption, and for the production of bicarbonate!!!! Come on, this is BASIC human physiology he is not grasping!!!!!!

Then Dr. Young falsely claims the kidneys store acids. The kidney IS NOT a storage organ and DOES NOT store acids.

Dr. Young then goes on to falsely claim these acids are buffered then eliminated via the skin, urinary tract and bowels. See the contradiction in his claims? If the bicarbonate buffers were used up by stomach acid leading to an increase of hydrochloric acid in the blood leading to acidosis as he claims then where is the bicarbonate buffers coming from that are supposedly buffering those acids? There are no other buffers in the blood. And if there were they would be used up by the hydrochloric acid in the blood if t really made it in to the blood which according to Dr. Young is causing acidosis. How can you buffer the metabolism acids if acidosis is present? The answer is you cannot. Yet this is what Dr. Young is claiming. So not only does he need to learn some human physiology, he also needs to learn some basic chemistry.

Dr. Young contradicts himself yet again with claim number 7. If a high animal protein meal caused acidosis as he falsely claims then the excess hydrogen ions from the acidosis he claims would be excreted through the kidneys causing ACIDIC, not alkaline urine. Then Dr. Young goes on to claim a base being excreted in the urine, which is the alkalinity. So where is this Base coming from? Again that base would have to be bicarbonate, which he claims earlier is depleted by the hydrochloric acid. So again, where is this base coming from if his claim were true?

Dr. Young’s myth about tissue acidosis leading to disease has already been addressed a number of times. The vast majority of diseases arise in an alkaline, not acidic environment.

On claim 8 Dr. Young talks about lactic acid during heavy exercise that in order to be absorbed by the collagen fibers as he falsely claims would have to be excreted. The lactic acid being excreted by muscles during heavy exercise myth was disproven decades ago!!!! During heavy exercise non-acidic lactate is formed, which IS NOT the same thing as lactic acid even though the terms get used interchangeably frequently. The burning sensation people feel IS NOT from lactic acid but rather an excess of hydrogen ions (protons).

Same with Dr. Young’s false claim that the lactic acid is stored in the tissues. How can this be occurring when no lactic acid is secreted from cells?

Dr. Young’s claim in 9 starts out bogus then gets outright bizarre where he refers to alkaliphile glands. Alkaliphiles are microorganisms, NOT glands!!!! So it looks like he is making up his own terms along with his “facts”.

In claim 9 Dr. young further incorrectly states that the body’s alkaline reserve status can be determined by blood or urinary pH testing. This is totally ludicrous!!!!! Salivary pH is affected by the amount of bacteria in the mouth so things such as brushing your teeth will make the saliva more alkaline. So will drinking water, thinking of certain foods, etc. Dry mouth increases acidity as alkaline saliva normally washes away acid forming bacteria in the mouth. Urinary pH is affected by hydration levels, certain supplements and medications and by bacteria in the urine. Urinary tract infections lead to highly alkaline urine as the bacteria use the enzyme urease to split urea in to highly alkaline ammonia. The alkalinity helps the bacteria, as with most pathogens, to survive.

Claim 10 starts out right away with a major error since this IS NOT how the blood pH is maintained. Again, pH is maintained through respiration and kidney retention or elimination of hydrogen ions (protons). If the acids were being pushed in to the connective tissues or spaces

And how can the blood give the urine the same amount of acidity if the tissues, such as the kidneys store the acids as Dr. Young claims?

Urinary pH DOES NOT reflect tissue pH. Tissue pH is maintained by the blood, which again does not reflect in urinary pH.

In claim 11 he refers again to “alkaliphile organs”. Again alkaliphiles ARE NOT glands, they are microbes.

Next Dr. Young refers to hyperproteinization leading to people looking like prunes as they age. More garbage!!! Wrinkles are the result of a lack of orthosilicic acid and/or ascorbic acid, which in turn leads to a loss of collagen and elastin in the skin. Orthosilicic acid loss occurs from a DECLINE in stomach acid since stomach acid aids in the conversion of silica in to the usable orthosilicic acid.

Apparently Dr. Young does not understand ORP either. Without going in to long explanation ORP is simply a sales tool often misrepresented to sell products. It DOES NOT measure all the antioxidants of the body.

In claim 12 Dr. Young talks about the acids being stored again, which is not true, the alkaline reserves being depleted that again is not true and again contradicts Dr. Young’s other claim of acids being excreted in to the urine at the same amount that is going in to the blood. Again, how can X amount of acid enter the blood and X amount be excreted in the urine if Y amount of acid from X is being stored in the tissues?

Most of the claims up to number 18 are just regurgitated proven wrong already claims.

I find it interesting in claim 18 though that Dr. Young mentions pH regulation by respiration and by the kidneys. If he is aware of these pH regulators then he should also be aware of the fact that this goes against his claim about HCl entering the blood leading to acidosis. Even if it were true that the acid could enter the blood the body responds to even the slightest shift in pH by adjusting respiration to either increase or decrease the pH of the blood. Since there are no reserves involved there are no reserves to be depleted as he claims. Same for kidney function, which is the second primary means of pH regulation.

Claim 20 does not make any sense either. Sodium bicarbonate IS NOT reabsorbed. It is neutralized by acid. The blood maintains bicarbonate levels, not sodium bicarbonate in the blood. Note that he even points this out in claim 21 where it states “CO2 + H2O = H2CO3 = HCO3 + H+”. Where is the sodium (Na)? It’s not there because he is talking about the blood bicarbonate, not sodium bicarbonate that he is incorrectly claiming is absorbed back in to the bloodstream.

In claim 22 Dr. Young claims ammonia is trapped and concentrated in the kidney. Again, the kidney DOES NOT store things, especially highly alkaline and highly toxic ammonia that would kill the tissues if it built up like Dr. Young is claiming.

In claim 23 Dr. Young claims and 90% of the carbon dioxide is used by the body to “reabsorb alkaline minerals and make sodium bicarbonate for buffering gastrointestinal and metabolic acids.” What is needed to absorb these alkaline minerals? STOMACH ACID!!!!! So once again Dr. Young is contradicting himself.

In claim 24 Dr, Young states: “Of all the ways the body can buffer metabolic and dietary acids, the excretion of protein (the eating of meat and cheese) generated acid residues is the only process that does not add sodium bicarbonate back into blood circulation. “.

First of all as pointed out sodium bicarbonate is neutralized by the acids, not reabsorbed in to the bloodstream. Blood bicarbonate (note not sodium bicarbonate) is formed in the blood from carbonic acid.

Secondly, what else is needed for sodium bicarbonate production? Sodium chloride salt, which is abundant in meats and dairy. So again his claims are contradictory.

At least in claim 25 Dr. Young gets something right when he states “Human Body is an acid producing organism by function”. The body is composed of acids, runs on acids, requires acids to maintain circulation and oxygen delivery, for maintaining health and tissues, for detoxification, etc.

What Dr. Young does not seem to understand is the fact that we cannot live or even exist without acids. Or the fact that ALL foods are metabolized in to acids, not just animal proteins.

-James Sloane

Top 5 Worst Internet Health Information Sites: Part 2: Alkaline/Acid Support Forum Part 2

Acids erroneously get a bad rap from sites trying to promote the alkalize for health myth. Acids are actually essential not only to our survival, but also our existence.  These essential acids include hydrochloric acid, pyruvic acid, acetic acid, carbonic acid, hyaluronic acid, glucuronic acid, malic acid, lactic acid, citric acid, uric acid, fatty acids, amino acids, ascorbic acid, pantothenic acid, folic acid, etc.

Acids generated by the body for health include:

  • Stomach acid for the digestion of proteins and to kill ingested pathogens.
  • Lactic, acetic and other flora generated fatty are needed for proper mineral absorption.
  • The same acids listed above also kill off pathogens.
  • Hyaluronic acid helps to prevent the spread of pathogens, cancer cells and venoms.
  • Hyaluronic acid also holds our cellular matrix together.
  • Flora generated fatty acids keep Candida growth under control and to keep Candida from morphing in to its pathogenic fungal form.
  • Glucuronic acid aids in detoxification of the body.
  • As building blocks for all cells, hormones, neurotransmitters, antibodies, etc.
  • Amino acids are needed the production of adenosine triphosphate (ATP), which fuels the cells and helps them to function properly.
  • Carbonic acid regulates blood pressure, is also required for the production of stomach acid and coverts highly toxic ammonia in to the antioxidant uric acid.
  • Citric acid is produced by bone cells to maintain healthy bones through bone remodeling.
  • Citric, malic and pyruvic acids are required form the formation of adenosine triphosphate that fuels our cells and helps them to function properly.

These are just some of the acids generated by the body to benefit the body.

The body also relies on external source of acids for health.  For example, one of the most common antioxidants in plants is the polyphenol tannic acid. Chaparral contains nordihydroguaiaretic acid (NDGA), the strongest natural antioxidant known.  Not only does NDGA work in both the lipid and water portions of cells unlike most antioxidants, NDGA has also been found to significantly inhibit cancer cells.  Chlorogenic acid and betulinic acid are powerful anti-viral and anti-cancer compounds.  Usinic acid is a strong antiseptic found in usnea lichen and kombucha tea. Benzoic acid is another strong antiseptic found in various plants. Amino acids not synthesized by the body must be obtained from external sources.  Same with fatty acids that serve various functions from killing pathogens to building cell membranes. Various vitamins required by the body such as vitamin C and B5 are acids. Orthosilicic acid derived from external sources and created with the help of stomach acid forms various tissues in the body.  These include bone, cartilage, skin, tendons, ligaments, teeth, etc.  Salicylic acid is a common anti-inflammatory found in a number of plants.

Ironically, the alkalize or die supporters are big fans of diets high in fruits and vegetables for health.  And what are some of the acids found in fruits and vegetables?  Oxalic acid, malic acid, citric acid, chlorogenic acid, succinic acid, fumaric acid, lactic acid, oxalacetic acid, tartaric acid, quinic acid, benzoic acid, acetic acid, allantoic acid, sulfuric acid, phosphoric acid…………

Speaking of diet, the alkaline supporters rely heavily on what they refer to as alkalizing foods.  Various lists of acid forming and alkaline forming foods can be found on the Internet, but they rarely match up.  Not surprising since there is not any solid science behind the claims.

For instance, one website shows various soy products as being highly alkaline, while another site claims soy is an acid forming food.  These same sites also disagree on white kidney beans with one site claiming they are acidic and the other alkaline.  Several sites I found claim avocado is alkaline and one claims it is acidic.  Looking at other sites I found one that claims honey is highly acidic and another site claiming honey is alkaline.  One site claims all forms of rice are acidic and another site claiming japonica and wild rice are alkaline. Blueberries are considered acidic on some sites and alkaline on other sites.  Depending on the site cow’s milk is considered alkaline, neutral or acidic regardless if raw or pasteurized. There are plenty more contradictions between the various sites.

I see a lot of the confusion being that there is no basis for the claims of acid or alkaline forming.  Sugar is considered acid forming even though the fruits and vegetables considered either acid or alkaline all contain the same sugars.  And fructose found in so many fruits that are considered alkaline is processed the same way as the fructose found in “junk foods” they consider acidic. Foods high in acids, such as lemon and kale are considered alkaline, while other acid sources such as pomegranates and cranberries are considered acidic.

There just does not seem to be any rational for the foods are either acidic or alkaline claims.  Foods high in protein you would think are acidic due to the breakdown of proteins results in highly alkaline ammonia first, which then forms uric acid.  Yet, spirulina which is nearly 4 times higher in protein than beef, which should be considered acidic is actually considered alkaline. Could it be based on fiber content?  Can’t be.  Jerusalem artichoke is considered acidic and sweet potatoes are considered alkaline despite both being high in fiber.  Could it be the starch content?  Again, not the case.  Yams, which are considered alkaline are nearly twice as high in starch than lentils that are considered acidic.  Maybe it is the simple sugar content.  Yet grapes, which are loaded with sugar are considered alkaline while Brussel sprouts, which are lower in sugar are considered acidic.  Maybe it is the mineral content.  Since there are so many different minerals I will just focus on the three that would be considered the primary alkaline minerals potassium, calcium and magnesium.  Blackberries, which are considered acidic are significantly higher in all three minerals than cantaloupe that is considered alkaline.

Milk regardless if raw or pasteurized still contains the same amount of protein, sugar and minerals.  Yet some people claim that raw milk is alkaline while pasteurized milk is acidic as where other people claim all forms of cow’s milk are either acidic, neutral or alkaline.

Beef is considered acidic even though it is high in “alkaline minerals” such as potassium, sodium, calcium and magnesium.

I have also seen lists claims that vinegar or kombucha tea are alkaline, even though there have been reports of people developing acidosis after consuming too much of these acid sources.

Lemon juice though, which also contains sugar and various acids is actually considered alkaline.  The actual pH of lemon juice is actually acidic, but as with every food and drink we ingest it stimulates an alkaline effect in the body.  How can this be?  Simple.  When we ingest foods or drinks the stomach acidity has to drop in pH to a certain level of acidity before the stomach can empty in to the intestines.  Therefore, it does not really matter what proteins, minerals, sugars, etc. that are in the food or drink.  They all leave the stomach at the same acidic pH range.

The stomach contents dumped in the intestines, known as chyme, is always acidic.  The intestines cannot handle this kind of acidity though.  Therefore, as soon as the chyme enters the first part of the intestine it is met with alkalizing sodium bicarbonate released by the pancreas.  Interestingly, the alkaline sodium bicarbonate is formed from sodium chloride salt that the alkaline supporters consider acidic.

From there the byproducts of the food can be dealt with in different ways.  Sugars for example are considered acid forming. So what is the acid byproduct of sugar metabolism?  Carbon dioxide. Is carbonic acid acidifying or alkalizing though?  Actually both.

Carbon dioxide combines with water to form carbonic acid.  Carbonic acid serves several beneficial functions for the body such as regulating blood pressure.

If a person hyperventilates this will cause the person’s blood to become excessively alkaline.  As a result the blood vessels constrict pushing blood away from the brain causing the person to pass out.  When the person passes out they fall down, which helps in part to restore blood flow to the brain.  Respiration also slows down or temporarily stops in part to increase carbonic acid levels back to normal.  This allows the blood vessels to relax restoring blood flow to the brain.

Another function of carbon dioxide is the formation of sodium bicarbonate.  The sodium is provided by sodium salt we ingest.  This sodium bicarbonate functions to neutralize the acidity of chyme as it leaves the stomach to protect the intestines from the acidity.

As proteins are broken down the amino acids that make them up are released.  Amino acids are based with ammonia, which is not only highly alkaline, but also highly poisonous to the body.  Carbonic acid helps convert the highly toxic ammonia in to uric acid.  Uric acid is one of the body’s primary antioxidants.  Because an acid is being used to covert the toxic ammonia in to another acid there is no real gain in acidity.

Carbonic acid is also required for the formation of stomach acid, which among other functions helps with the absorption of minerals needed to build bone.

Excess carbon dioxide is eliminated so that the proper pH of the blood is maintained.

As we can see it does not matter what the food is the results are all the same.  Food is first brought to an acidic pH then the acidity is neutralized as it leaves the stomach.  The only way a food can alter the body’s pH to make it either acidic or alkaline is for that food to overwhelm the body’s natural pH buffers.  This is extremely difficult to do unless consuming extremely large amounts of acid sources like vinegar or alkaline substances like calcium carbonate.

The only foods that do not have their pH altered by the stomach acid or the bicarbonate released on the chyme are fibers.  Fibers are not really food for the body though, but rather the flora.  The beneficial acid producing flora that inhabit various parts of our body enzymatically break down fibers, which are long chain sugar molecules, in to simple sugars to feed on.  The bacterial fermentation of these sugars allow the bacteria to produce acids that control pathogen overgrowth and aid in mineral absorption.

Now we can see why the acid food and alkaline food claims contradict each other.  They are not based on any real facts, but rather opinions.

Even if the blood starts to become acidic the primary means of pH for the body is respiration.  Therefore, as blood acidity increases so does the respiratory rate to increase alkalinity by decreasing carbonic acid and hydrogen ions.  On the other hand if someone goes in to alkalosis their respiratory rate will decrease or temporarily stop to allow the buildup of carbonic acid and hydrogen ions to restore the pH.

If the pH goes beyond the range that respiration alone can handle then the body can use other means to maintain it’s pH.  Kidneys are second in line for maintaining pH.  Kidneys do this primarily by retaining or excreting hydrogen ions and bicarbonate to raise or lower pH.

Respiration and kidney function account for virtually all the pH regulation in the body.  Since neither contain “alkaline reserves” there is no depletion of “alkaline reserves” as is often claimed by the alkaline diet myth supporters.

Of course primary pH regulation is more involved, but I am trying to give a very basic expiation for people.  If you want a more detailed explanation of respiratory pH regulation here is some suggested reading with a more involved but still simple to follow explanation:

Some people claim that acid foods deplete the bones of minerals because the bone minerals are used to buffer the acids.  This is even more rare than acidosis itself since buffering of blood acids with bone minerals is the last resort used by the body to maintain pH.  Again respiration is the body’s main means of pH regulation followed by hydrogen ion retention or elimination by the kidneys.  These account for virtually all the pH regulation of blood.  The body also uses protein buffers, such as albumin, and phosphate buffers to regulate blood pH long before using bone minerals.  Therefore, acidosis would have to be extreme and long term before the acidosis would have any effect on the bones.  In acidosis this extreme the worry would not be bone loss, but simply survival since severe acidosis can be deadly.  Luckily acidosis this extreme is so rare that a person would likely have a better chance of being struck by lightening multiple times than to develop acidosis this severe.

There are some foods that are considered acidic such as beef, dairy and colas that can induce bone loss.  This process though has NOTHING to do with acidity.  These are all high phosphorus sources, which is what leads to the bone loss.  Phosphorus is essential to an extent to maintain healthy bones, but in excess it leads to bone loss by triggering a process known as pseudohyperparathyroidism (PHPT).  This is similar to another condition known as hyperparathyroidism (HPT).  In both cases the parathyroid glands release a hormone known as parathyroid hormone (PTH), which breaks bone tissue down raising serum calcium levels.  There are several causes of this.  Parathyroid nodules, which are believed to be triggered by a lack of vitamin D can increase PTH output.  PTH is also released in response to either actual serum calcium deficiencies, such as from insufficient vitamin D levels, or perceived low serum calcium levels.  The release of PTH due to perceived low serum calcium is known as PHPT.  When people consume foods high in phosphorus an imbalance can occur between calcium and phosphorus levels with a major increase in the phosphorus ratio.  The parathyroid glands respond to this perceived drop in calcium by releasing PTH, which raises calcium levels to restore balance of the calcium-phosphorus ratio.  Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with these foods being acidic.

Milk does contain a large amount of calcium, but it still induces PHPT for a simple reason.  Protein in milk blocks calcium absorption, but not phosphorus absorption.  Protein’s blocking action on calcium absorption is also evidenced by the myth that milk creates mucus, which I addressed in this video:

It is also evidenced by the fact that the two nations with the highest consumption of dairy in the world, the United States and Finland also have the highest rates of bone mineralization diseases in the world.

Another common misconception promoted heavily on alkaline promoting sites is that pH strips can be used to monitor blood pH by testing the pH of either the urine or the saliva. Salivary and urinary pH though do not reflect the actual pH.  The pH of both can change for a number of reasons without changes in the blood pH.

Urinary pH for example can change depending on the amount of urine hydration there is or the amount of minerals being excreted through the urine.  Some medications can also alter urinary pH.  Bacterial infections can split urea to produce highly alkaline ammonia to protect themselves from acidity.  In this process urinary pH rises (becomes alkaline) from the infection despite no changes to the blood pH.

Salivary pH increases as we sleep since saliva production shuts down.  Saliva helps to alkalize the mouth and wash away acid forming bacteria in the mouth.  Therefore,  when we sleep the bacteria levels go up, also resulting in “morning breath”, causing a lower (acidic) pH in the mouth.  As we wake up and become more active saliva helps to wash away some of the bacteria and brings the pH of the mouth back up.  Dry mouth from methamphetamine use, certain medications like antihistamines or certain diseases such as Sjogren’s syndrome can also lower the salivary pH.  Other factors that can affect salivary pH include whether or not you just brushed your teeth or what you recently ate or drank.  It has also been known for decades that something as simple as thinking about a certain food can alter salivary pH as the pH of the saliva adjusts in anticipation of the food.

This is why the only way you will know what your blood pH is would be through a blood test.  And even that can change in an instant.  For example, as I have pointed out a number of times respiration is the body’s primary method of pH control.  Hyperventilating will alkalize the body quickly, but you will also pass out due to the induced alkalosis.

This is an example of why I encourage people to learn how the body really works instead of accepting all the hype out there on the internet or in books, magazines, etc.  I recall when the book Alkalize or Die book came out.  And of course many people simply accepted the claims as fact without bothering to check other sources to see if this author’s opinion were fact.

I know scare tactics help to sell books, but still we are talking about people’s health and people are profiting off this nonsense they promote while putting people’s health at risk.  Just because something is in print this does not make it automatically true.

Top 5 Worst Internet Health Information Sites: Part 2: Cancer Support Forum

There is no disease that scares the average person more than cancer.  Unfortunately there are a lot of con artists out there that are ready to take advantage of people’s fears about cancer in both the allopathic and the holistic fields to sell them on bogus therapies.

The danger is not just from bogus therapies being promoted but also from the misinformation that keeps getting repeated.  Large part of the problem is that someone reads or hears something about cancer on the Internet, from a book or from some other person that they never bother to research to confirm if the claims are true.  This leads to the same misinformation being repeated over and over.

Having been doing cancer research for 32 years I have looked in to numerous therapies and claims.  I am even working on a book currently as a review of holistic cancer therapies explaining the facts behind various cancer myths and explaining what works, what is questionable and what is outright quackery.  I decided to write the book after being banned from the Cancer Support forum on Curezone for posting evidence against some of the quackery and other misinformation.

A lot of the misinformation was being posted by Tony Isaacs, who has his own forum on Curezone, but moderates the Cancer Support forum.  As with so many of the moderators on Curezone, Isaacs has a tendency to suppress any evidence he disagrees with.  We ended up butting heads numerous times especially over his misrepresentations of “oleander soup” being effective against cancer including misinterpreting studies that showed oleander as being ineffective but presenting them as proof as effectiveness.  When I posted evidence to the contrary my posts were moved or deleted from the Cancer Support forum and Mr. Isaacs went on a personal campaign to attack me personally and even tried recruiting others to join in on the attacks despite the attacks being a violation of the Curezone Terms of Service (TOS).  Reporting the violations to the Webmaster got me nowhere since Isaacs pays for advertising on Curezone.  Therefore, the Webmaster once again is putting money before health and safety.  Interestingly, I had saved my messages to the Webmaster with all the evidence of Mr. Isaacs violations in my personal folder on Curezone.  After posting about the violations on my own forum on Curezone my personal messages with the evidence were suddenly deleted.  Luckily I learned a long time ago though to back up posts and messages of Curezone since they do have a tendency to be deleted or reworded to hide violations, especially by moderators and their associates.

Oleander is the most promoted treatment on the Curezone Cancer Support forum due to Isaac being the moderator.  Most promoted does not mean most effective though, or even effective at all.  Oleander has been shown to be effective against a few cancer cell lines in Petri dishes, but actual human studies have found oleander to be ineffective for cancer.  I addressed Mr. Isaac’s claims in my previous blog posts:

Another person that posts on the Curezone Cancer Support forum is Bret Peirce, who is the founder of American Cancer Advocates.  Mr. Peirce has made numerous claims about cancer that directly contradict what the studies in the various medical journals claim.  Although, Mr. Pierce has stated several times that he would post the evidence to his claims or send me the evidence neither has ever happened.  Even my repeated requests reminding Mr. Peirce about his statements that he was going to supply the research to back his claims have been ignored.  This leads to me to believe that the “evidence” Mr. Perice claims to have that is the basis for this recommendations does not exist in the first place.

Another problem I have with Mr. Peirce is that he loves to use a lot of scientific words that appears he does not understand.  There is nothing wrong with using scientific words provided they are used properly.  When someone tries to use scientific words though just to make themselves sound more intelligent then this presents a problem.  I am going to address some of his other posts in future blogs.  As an example though, I have addressed some of Mr. Peirce’s claims on ozone in this blog post:

When people post their health issues on places like Curezone they are putting their health, safety and trust in to the people who are responding to their posts.  When people make up claims as to the safety or effectiveness of therapies or pretend to know things they really know very little to nothing about then the persons health and trust is put at risk.  Would you ask your auto mechanic who knows nothing about cancer how to treat cancer?  Of course not.  If you are going to ask advice like this you expect the person you are asking to have a good knowledge of the subject.

Unfortunately, Curezone’s Cancer Support forum has a lot of people who simply post answers to promote their own agenda or information they simply read on a sale’s site somewhere.   They are not even taking the time to research what they read on these sales sites to see if the claims are true or not, so a lot of proven misinformation simply gets repeated over and over.  Some of the common misconceptions that keep getting repeated include:

  • Everyone has cancer cells.  If this were the case then none of us would be alive considering how well cancer cells can evade the immune system.  People claiming this either heard this myth somewhere and are repeating it or are mistaking excessive cellular growth with actual malignancies.
  • Cancer cannot survive in a high oxygen atmosphere.
  • Cancer cells thrive in the absence of oxygen.  In reality a lack of oxygen kills cancer cells, which stimulates the process of angiogenesis to increase oxygen levels to the tumor so it can survive.
  • Cancer cells are anaerobic.  Cancer cells have actually been found to be highly aerobic, but like healthy cells rely on both anaerobic glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation for survival and function.
  • Shark’s don’t get cancer.  This myth was heavily promoted by the books titled Shark’s Don’t Get Cancer and Shark’s Still Don’t Get Cancer.  The book was published to promote shark cartilage as an angiogenesis inhibitor to treat cancer.  The fact though is that sharks DO get cancer and the whole shark cartilage thing was heavily mispromoted.  I will go in to this more in detail in a later blog post.
  • Oxygen cannot enter cancer cells unless alkalized.
  • Cancer cannot survive in an alkaline environment.  Actually the internal pH of cancer cells are more alkaline than healthy cells, which helps them to survive and thrive.
  • Cancer is a survival mechanism.
  • Cancer is a mold or fungus.
  • Cancer is caused by a parasite.  Even though there are some parasite associated cancers these types of cancer are EXTREMELY rare.
  • Cancer is a modern disease.  Fossil records show evidence of cancer even pre-dating modern humans.
  • Cancer cells are acidic because they produce lactic acid.  Actually , cancer cells produce non-acidic lactate.  They do not produce lactic acid as is commonly claimed.  The drop in extracellular pH (acidity) comes from the acidic protons generated by cancer cells that they export out of themselves since cancer cells cannot tolerate an internal acidic pH.
  • Phytoestrogens promote cancer.  Phytoestrogens, which are found in all plants have a long history of being used to treat cancer.  For example,  various studies have found soy phytoestrogens to be effective against estrogen promoted cancers.  Flax seed, which is nearly 4 times higher in phytoestrogens than raw soy has also been used therapeutically to treat cancer.  For example, these studies:

And a series of medical abstracts on the subject:

One of the most persistent myths about cancer is that Otto Warburg won the Nobel Peace Prize for proving cancer was the result of a lack of oxygen.  Warburg actually won the Nobel Peace Prize for the discovery of an enzyme associated with cancer.  And Warburg never claimed cancer was the result of a lack of oxygen.  If people read his actual speech they will find that what Warburg actually claimed was that cancer cells would continue to ferment regardless of how much oxygen was present.  Despite what Warburg actually stated not even being close to the “cancer is caused by a lack of oxygen” the claim was repeated over and over primarily through sales sites.  Eventually Warburg’s statement eventually morphed in to the false notion that cancer was the result of a lack of oxygen.  Here are some of the examples of research readily available that prove cancer cells are reliant on oxygen:

It is interesting to note that cancer cells use sixty percent anaerobic metabolism. Anaerobic conditions may be a significant risk factor for cancer. The fact is, in normal cells both types of metabolism are going on at all times, but the experience of vital, normal health requires that aerobic metabolism predominate. That is where TNAS comes in.”

“In contrast to tumor-associated fibroblasts, the newly formed endothelial cells expressed GLUT1 well above the levels exhibited by mature colon vessels, suggesting active uptake of glucose from the blood stream, ready to be used aerobically for energy production. The oxygen, diffused through the tumor-associated vasculature, seems to be necessary for the survival of intratumoral endothelium and stroma but is unlikely to have a major contribution to energy production for cancer cells, as it is indicated by the low PDH, high PDK1, high LDH5, and high GLUT1 cancer cell reactivity.”

“Thompson et al. showed in a recent study that activation of a single oncogene, Akt, is sufficient to stimulate aerobic glycolysis in tumors ( 5)”

“The experimental procedure showed very clearly that the 3 tumors studied were able to remove oxygen from blood as well as or better than non-neoplastic tissues. This would not be expected to occur if any impairment of the ability to utilize oxygen did involve the neoplastic cells in vivo. A deficiency of oxygen produced by hypo-oxygenation was unable to induce an appreciable increase of blood flow through the tumor. From our data, one would expect that in vivo the tumors will compensate for a deficiency of oxygen by an increase of the oxygen removal ratio rather than by an increased blood flow.”

“Cancer cells frequently display high rates of aerobic glycolysis in comparison to their nontransformed counterparts”

“These data suggest that activation of the Akt oncogene is sufficient to stimulate the switch to aerobic glycolysis characteristic of cancer cells and that Akt activity renders cancer cells dependent on aerobic glycolysis for continued growth and survival.”

One of the most bizarre claims I have seen made about cancer is that cancer is a survival mechanism made by Andreas Moritz.  I addressed some of Moritz’s other wild claims on my previous blog post Top 5 Worst Internet Health Information Sites: Part 3: Liver Flush Forum:

Moritz’s claims are not only bizarre but very dangerous.  By convincing people that cancer is a survival mechanism people may decide to not do anything about their cancer since they will see the cancer as a benefit and think the body will right itself in the long run.  Cancer is not a survival mechanism, it is not beneficial to the body and cancer does not keep the body alive.  Cancer is dangerous, damaging and deadly.  I addressed some of Moritz’s wild claims regarding his “cancer is a survival mechanism” myth here:

As mentioned previously too many of these claims being made are simply from someone reading bogus information on sales sites then repeating the claims without ever bothering to verify the claims.  I posted a great example of this back a while ago on the claims being made by Ty Bollinger:

Another example of questionable information was posted on my forum about Dr. Harvey Bilgelsen.  The link that was posted to his site is no longer functioning.  Bilgelsen also claims that Warburg found that if oxygen levels in a cell drop below 60% that the cell becomes cancerous.  Not only did Warburg never make that claim, but current research has disproven this claim anyway.

This is not the only error Bilgelsen makes though.  Bilgesen’s premise is that cancers are caused from the blood becoming too alkaline. Here is a quote from his site “When the body is stressed, the sympathetic nervous system takes over and the cells become more acid and they dump alkaline waste, which elevates the pH of the venous blood setting up the cancer terrain.” This is the exact opposite of the alkaline supporters who falsely claim that acidity causes cancer.  Neither alkalinity nor acidity are the cause of cancer.

I wonder what kind of doctor Bilgensen is supposed to be since his statements regarding physiology are contradictory.  For example, Bilgensen states that cancer develops when blood oxygenation is low and the pH of the blood is high.  The problem with this claim is that it is contradictory.  Blood pH is increased by oxygen, which reduces carbonic acid and acidic protons from the blood.  A lack of oxygen in the blood actually decreases the pH by increasing the level of carbonic acid and protons.

Later in his article he claims that hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is effective for treating cancer.  I don’t know where he is getting his information, but HBOT has never been shown to cure cancer.  And again, this contradicts his earlier claim that alkalinity causes cancer since HBOT will raise the pH of the blood increasing its alkalinity.

Bilgensen continues by claiming “, if you ever get the pH of the blood below 7.35 or definitely 7.32, Cancer will die all over the body”.  At first glance the premise does seem plausible since cancer cells can be damaged or killed by acidity.  This is why cancer cells export acidic protons in to the extracellular matrix to protect themselves from the acidity.  This leaves the cancer cells more alkaline than the healthy surrounding cells.  This leaves the obvious question though of if the blood pH below 7.32 is sufficient to kill cancer cells then why doesn’t the acidity of the protons in the extracellular matrix kill the cancer cells?

Another misconception by Bilgensen is that cancer is a mold.  This is similar to the claims of Dr. Simoncini who claims cancer is a fungus.  Cancer cells are not even close to the same as mold or fungi cells.

Despite these contradictions, misrepresentations and outright false information it amazes me how many posters on Curezone not only fall for these kind of claims, but worse yet keep promoting it despite the solid evidence to the contrary.

As a final note I want people to remember that misinformation can be more dangerous than the cancer itself.

Ozone Misinformation

I was recently reading a post on the internet entitled “Ozone Therapy/ Common Mistakesposted by Bret Peirce, founder of American Cancer Advocates.

Even though the concept of the article is good, most of the information is incorrect.

Ozone therapy is fantastic for many things and administered properly is one of the safest therapies available for many diseases and disorders including cancer.  As with any therapy though, ozone therapy can be very dangerous and cause a lot of harm and possibly even death if improperly administered.  Therefore, the goal of this blog article is to address what I see as misinforming claims being made by Mr. Peirce regarding ozone therapy.

Mr. Peirce starts by stating he is listing the primary mistakes made with ozone therapy in regards to cancer.

In the first claim Mr. Peirce states a failure to check lactic acid levels before starting the therapy.  The problem with this claim is that contrary to popular belief cancer cells DO NOT secrete lactic acid.  In fact, no human cells secrete lactic acid.  The only cells in or on the body that secrete lactic acid are beneficial bacterial cells that inhabit the body commonly referred to as “flora”.  These bacteria secrete lactic and other acids to help control pathogens and to aid in nutrient assimilation.

Human cells can generate non-acidic lactate, which is frequently and incorrectly referred to as lactic acid even though lactic acid and lactate are not the same thing.

Regardless, lactate is an important fuel for the body’s cells and is generally regulated by the body preventing excessively high or low levels.

Reading Mr. Peirce’s past posts Mr. Peirce’s reasoning is that oxygen cannot enter cancer cells unless the cells are sufficiently alkalized. Therefore, Mr. Peirce recommends using heavy metal salts to neutralize the lactic acid so oxygen from oxygen therapies can enter the cancer cells.  The problems with these claims are:

  1.  Cancer cells do not secrete lactic acid.
  2. The internal pH of cancer cells is already more alkaline than healthy cells and excess alkalinity of healthy cells have been shown to induce transformation of healthy cells in to cancer cells (1,2,3,4,5,6).  Cancer cells cannot tolerate an acidic pH, which kills them, and therefore cancer cells export acidic hydrogen ions (protons) in to the external matrix to maintain the internal alkalinity cancer cells need to survive and proliferate (5,6,7,8).
  3. Alkalinity actually promotes anaerobic glycolysis of cancer cells (9).  This could be from the fact that alkalinity reduces oxygen utilization by inhibiting oxygen release from hemoglobin and by constricting blood vessels leading to decreased circulation(10,11,12).
  4. Cancer cells have a higher affinity for oxygen than normal cells and utilize that oxygen very well (13,14).  On the other hand cancer cells die in the absence of oxygen.  The process of cancer cells dying due to a lack of oxygen during their early stages of development lead to the production of angiogenesis growth factors that stimulate the formation of blood vessels that brings sufficient oxygen and nutrients to the cancer cells for the cancer cells to survive and thrive (13,15,16).

Therefore, adding heavy metal alkaline salts as is being recommended will make no difference as regards to the effectiveness of ozone therapy, but the salts can pose health problems themselves.

For example, the most common alkaline salt recommended for cancer treatment alone or with ozone is cesium chloride.  The use of cesium chloride is actually based on numerous false premises, but that is another story.  Cesium chloride has not only been shown to be a failure in the treatment of cancer, it has also been shown to induce cancer and promote existing cancers (17,18,19,20,21,22,23).

Cesium chloride can also cause heart related side effects (24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34) and liver damage (35).

In Mr. Peirce’s second claim Mr. Peirce claims it is a mistake to fail using a maximum dose.  Not only is this claim incorrect, but it is EXTREMELY dangerous!

First of all there is no definition of “dose”.  Dose could refer to the concentration or the volume, which both present their problems in excess.

Concentration refers to the milligrams per milliliter (mg/ml) also referred to as gamma.  Since most ozone therapy for cancer is administered internally through injection or insufflation the proper concentration is essential.  Ozone is administered internally only in trace amounts of ozone to oxygen since higher concentrations can damage tissues and hemolyze red blood cells leading to serious health issues.

Volume refers the actual amount of ozone administered at a given concentration.  If ozone is administered at the proper concentration then larger volumes can be administered as long as it is administered slow enough.  Administering a large volume of ozone to quickly by injection or vaginal insufflations risks the possibility of embolus.  Administering ozone too quickly though by rectal insufflation risks overinflating the colon and rupturing the colon wall.

Mr. Peirce’s claims continue with oxidative stress can be countered by adding catalase. And if no oxidative stress is present the person can go higher in their dose.

If the author had done his research he would have found that catalase (CAT) is only one of several antioxidant enzymes produced by the body.  And CAT along with superoxide dismutase (SOD) and peroxidases are increased by properly administered ozone therapy.  This reduces the risk of oxidative damage to healthy cells already, but a high concentration or dose of ozone too quickly can still cause damage or death regardless of the increase of antioxidant enzymes stimulated by ozone therapy.

Pathogens and cancer cells lack these defenses.  This is why cancer cells and pathogens are  selectively destroyed by properly administered ozone therapy without destruction to healthy tissue.

Excessive concentrations of ozone though can overwhelm the body’s antioxidant enzyme systems though leading to tissue destruction.  As mentioned earlier this is why the recommendation of maximizing ozone dosing is not only incorrect, but also dangerous.

It also needs to be kept in mind that the antioxidant enzymes taken as a supplement may be destroyed long before they could be absorbed unless they are enteric coated.

Since many people use ozone therapy personally at home there would not be a way for them to monitor the oxidative stress on red blood cells.  Even in a clinical setting where blood samples can be monitored for oxidative stress by the time the red blood cells are hemolyzed it is too late.  Therefore it is essential to use the proper concentration of ozone used in guidelines for ozone therapy set by over a hundred years of proper research and not just go for a “maximum ozone dosing” as recommended by Mr. Peirce.

Another issue with high dose ozone being overlooked by Mr. Peirce is that rapid destruction of cancer cells can not only lead to tissue damage, but also potentially kill the patient.  There are several reasons for this:

-The destruction of cancer cells leads to the formation of uric acid.  A sudden high uric acid load can lead to kidney damage as these sharp crystals get excreted through the kidneys where they can cut up the kidney tissue.  Other tissues in the local region of the destroyed tumor can also be damaged from the elevated uric acid.  This is especially dangerous in the case of brain tumors as the uric acid can inflame the brain tissue leading to dangerous brain swelling.  Since the brain is inside an inflexible skull there is no room for the expansion and the brain can suffer crushing damage if the brain swells too much within the skull.  To reduce these risks the cancer cells must be killed off little by little to allow time for clearance of the uric acid.  Drinking plenty of water throughout the day when using ozone therapy to help hydrolyze the uric acid in to safer urea can also help.

High dose ozone can further increase uric acid levels by hemolyzing red blood cells.  Hemolysis though does not occur when proper ozone levels are used, which are actually quite dilute when administered internally.

-The destruction of cancer cells leads to an increase of alkaline potassium released from the cancer cells as they are destroyed.  A sudden surge of potassium can create electrolyte imbalances that can impair heart function if cancer cells are destroyed too rapidly by higher than recommended ozone levels.

-In cases of brain tumors there is also danger of swelling if cancer cells are destroyed too quickly not only due to uric acid induced inflammation, but also due to the release of serum from dead cancer cells and the surge in potassium that can draw water in to the tissues by osmosis.  Again, this can be avoided by slowly destroying the cancer cells with the dilute doses of ozone used with internal ozone therapy rather than the dangerous “maximum ozone dosing” recommended by Mr. Peirce.

-The other risk is a dangerous infection condition known as sepsis.  Large tumors can be destroyed very easily with high dose ozone, but this is not a safe thing to do.  Dead cancer cells constitute infectious material to the body just like any other dead tissue in the body.  Of a person had a malignant tumor the size of a basketball it could be easily destroyed with a single ozone treatment using high concentrations of ozone. But the massive amount of dead cellular debris would kill the patient from sepsis.  Again, ozone therapy needs to be used in low concentrations, not “maximum ozone dosing”, to gradually kill the cancer cells.  And it is essential to allow time between treatments for the body to clear the dead cellular debris as well as the uric acid, and to allow time for the electrolytes to rebalance.  Using a shotgun approach of “maximum ozone dosing” could kill the patient.

Mr. Peirce then repeats the myth that alkaline salts are required to allow oxygen to enter the cancer cells.  This claim is based on the myth that cancer cells are totally anaerobic.  Cancer cells though are only partially anaerobic with the majority of energy for cancer cells being produced by an aerobic processes known as oxidative phosphorylation (OxPhos).  In other words, oxygen not only readily enters cancer cells, but cancer cells are highly reliant on oxygen for energy production.  A low pH does not interfere with this process as Mr. Peirce claims.

Interestingly, Mr. Pierce later contradicts himself by admitting “hormone dependent cancers, sarcomas, and advanced cancers can also burn glucose oxidatively”.  This would be impossible if oxygen could not get in to cancer cells without alkaline salts as Mr. Pierce claimed previously.

Additionally, it is not only hormone dependent, sarcomas and advanced cancers that burn glucose oxidatively.  All malignant tumors including cancers in their earliest stages primarily burn glucose through OxPhos as studies have shown (13,14).

Next on Mr. Peirce’s list is an application failure.  In this case Mr. Peirce states “it is a mistake to not use ozone in high enough concentrations as well as causing irritation to the tissues or not using a humidifier”.

As previously mentioned though high concentrations of ozone are contradicted in internal ozone therapy due to the fact that high concentrations of ozone will damage the tissues and destroy red blood cells.  In addition, as pointed out in cases of cancer high concentrations of ozone can lead to tissue damage and possibly death.  The correct concentration of ozone used in internal therapies is  highly dilute, not concentrated as Mr. Peirce advises.  The recommended concentration of ozone for internal therapy is only around 0.1% ozone and 99.9% oxygen to prevent tissue damage and hemolysis.

This brings up another of Mr. Peirce’s contradictions.  Mr. Peirce keeps recommending high concentrations of ozone, which will cause tissue irritation and damage while at the same time claiming it is a mistake to cause tissue irritation with ozone.

The use of a humidifier in ozone therapy is controversial.  The humidification will result in a loss of some of the ozone as the ozone reacts with the moisture to form peroxides.  This may be helpful in the sense of reducing the damage that could occur from improperly using high concentrations of ozone.  Although, this also means that the person will not be able to properly gauge the level of ozone being administered for safety and effectiveness.  Imagine if your pharmacist was diluting down your medications with a random amount of water then telling you to take the same dose as would be normally recommended.  That would be ridiculous, yet this is the same principle as using a humidifier with ozone.  This is one of the reasons I don’t use humidifiers with ozone.  The second reason is because the mucus membranes and blood are already moist.  Therefore, if proper low concentrations of ozone are given in the first place the required moisture for oxidation will already be present in sufficient levels.

Another dangerous claim made by Mr. Peirce is at the end of his paragraph discussing inhaling ozone.  Mr. Peirce is correct that inhaling ozone is an irritant.  Mr. Peirce goes on to say though that inhaling ozone must be done at a lower concentration through a humidifier.  He also recommends doing slight exercise during the therapy and running the oxygen through the ozone generator at up to 6 liters per minute.  And finally Mr. Peirce states if the ozone causes a cough or irritation despite the humidifier to slow down the oxygen rate.  So what are the problems with these claims?

Well, first of all it is not recommended to inhale ozone for several reasons.  The lungs are more sensitive to ozone than other tissues and can be easily damaged by high levels of ozone.  In addition, ozone can trigger asthma attacks in those prone to asthma.

The most dangerous part of Mr. Peirce’s claim is that if a cough or irritation develops that you should slow down the oxygen rate.  The problem with doing this  is that this will significantly INCREASE the concentration of ozone increasing the risk of serious damage.  Ozone concentration is regulated by several factors such as voltage and discharge tube length.  The third factor is the flow rate of oxygen. The faster the flow rate the less contact time the oxygen has in the discharge tube and thus the lower the ozone concentration.  When you slow down the flow rate as Mr. Perice dangerously advises there is a greater contact time of the oxygen in the discharge tube, which increases the concentration of ozone. If you are developing a cough or irritation from the ozone concentration as it is showing damage occurring then why would anyone recommend increasing the concentration dangerously higher?!!!

Another issue not even mentioned by Mr. Peirce is that there are different methods of generating ozone and not all ozone units can utilize oxygen as a starter gas.  Using air with ultraviolet or hot corona systems also present a problem of the generation of nitrogen and sulfur based acids that can irritate or burn the tissues in the presence of moisture.

Anyone considering ozone therapy should research the subject thoroughly before initiating the therapy.  Thoroughly researching the subject is also recommended even if receiving ozone from a practitioner to make sure they understand the therapy and are administering the therapy properly for the particular condition.
Select References:

  1. Na+/H+ exchanger-dependent intracellular alkalinization is an early event in malignant transformation and plays an essential role in the development of subsequent transformation-associated phenotypes. FASEBJ 2000 Nov;14(14):2185-97
  2. Tumorigenic 3T3 cells maintain an alkaline intracellular pH under physiological conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990 October; 87(19): 7414–7418
  3. 31P NMR analysis of intracellular pH of Swiss Mouse 3T3 cells: effects of extracellular Na+ and K+ and mitogenic stimulation. J Membr Biol 1986;94(1):55-64
  4. Extracellular Na+ and initiation of DNA synthesis: role of intracellular pH and K+. J Cell Biol 1984 Mar;98(3):1082-9
  5. Vacuolar H(+)-ATPase in Cancer Cells: Structure and Function. Atlas of Genetics and Cytogenetics in Oncology and Haematology       Sept. 2011
  6. Vacuolar H+-ATPase in human breast cancer cells with distinct metastatic potential: distribution and functional activity. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 286: C1443–C1452, 2004
  7.  Targeting vacuolar H+-ATPases as a new strategy against cancer. Cancer Res 2007 Nov 15;67(22):10627-30
  8.  Vacuolar H(+)-ATPase signaling pathway in cancer. Curr Protein Pept Sci 2012 Mar;13(2):152-63
  9. Role of the Intracellular pH in the Metabolic Switch Between Oxidative Phosphorylaiton and Aerobic Glycolysis-Relavance to Cancer.  Cancer 2011;2(3):WMC001716
  10. Biochemistry, Mary Campbell, Ph.D. and Shawn Farrell, Ph.D. 2005
  11. Regulatory mechanisms of hemoglobin oxygen affinity in acidosis and alkalosis.       J Clin Invest 1971 March; 50(3): 700–706
  12. Hematology in clinical practice: a guide to diagnosis and management Robert S. Hillman, Kenneth A. Ault, Henry M. Rinder 2002
  13. Oxygen Consumption Can Regulate the Growth of Tumors, a New Perspective on the Warburg Effect. PLoS One 2009 Sep 15;4(9):e7033
  14. Choosing between glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation: a tumor’s dilemma? Biochim Biophys Acta 2011 Jun;1807(6):552-61
  15. Anoxia is necessary for tumor cell toxicity caused by a low-oxygen environment. Cancer Res 2005 Apr 15;65(8):3171-8
  16.  Relationship between oxygen and glucose consumption by transplanted tumors in vivo. Cancer Res 1967 Jun;27(6):1041-52
  17. Relative protection given by extract of Phyllanthus emblica fruit and an equivalent amount of vitamin C against a known clastogen–caesium chloride.
  18. Food Chem Toxicol 1992 Oct;30(10):865-9
  19. Inhibition of clastogenic effects of cesium chloride in mice in vivo by chlorophyllin. Toxicol Lett 1991 Jun;57(1):11-7
  20. Comparative efficacy of chlorophyllin in reducing cytotoxicity of some heavy metals. Biol Met 1991;4(3):158-61
  21. Modification of cesium toxicity by calcium in mammalian system. Biol Trace Elem Res 1991 Nov;31(2):139-45
  22. Cytogenetic damage induced in vivo to mice by single exposure to cesium chloride. Environ Mol Mutagen 1991;18(2):87-91
  23. Clastogenic effects of cesium chloride on mouse bone marrow cells in vivo. Mutat Res 1990 Aug;244(4):295-8
  24. Cesium toxicity: a case of self-treatment by alternate therapy gone awry. Ther Drug Monit 2003 Feb;25(1):114-6
  25. Acquired long QT syndrome secondary to cesium chloride supplement. J Altern Complement Med 2006 Dec;12(10):1011-4
  26. Acquired long QT syndrome and monomorphic ventricular tachycardia after alternative treatment with cesium chloride for brain cancer. Mayo Clin Proc 2004 Aug;79(8):1065-9
  27. Polymorphic ventricular tachycardia in a woman taking cesium chloride. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2001 Apr;24(4 Pt 1):515-7
  28. Life-threatening Torsades de Pointes resulting from “natural” cancer treatment.       Clin Toxicol (Phila) 2009 Jul;47(6):592-4
  29. Torsades de pointes – a report of a case induced by caesium taken as a complementary medicine, and the literature review. J Clin Pharm Ther 2013 Jun;38(3):254-7
  30. Cesium-induced QT-interval prolongation in an adolescent. Pharmacotherapy 2008 Aug;28(8):1059-65
  31. Cesium chloride-induced torsades de pointes. Can J Cardiol 2009 Sep;25(9):e329-31
  32. Cesium chloride induced ventricular arrhythmias in dogs: three-dimensional activation patterns and their relation to the cesium dose applied. Basic Res Cardiol 2000 Apr;95(2):152-62.
  33. Cesium-induced atrial tachycardia degenerating into atrial fibrillation in dogs: atrial torsades de pointes? J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1998 Sep;9(9):970-5
  34. Spontaneous, electrically, and cesium chloride induced arrhythmia and afterdepolarizations in the rapidly paced dog heart. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2001 Apr;24(4 Pt 1):474-85
  35. The high pH therapy for cancer tests on mice and humans. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1984;21 Suppl 1:1-5

Tag Cloud