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: Curezone.org 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.