I can’t believe some of the posts on this newsgroup these days. Sure there
may be some people posting some "unusual" or "questionable" treatments for
cancer, but do we really need to stoop so low as to make personal attacks.
Even attacking Dr Roda when he makes intelligent and thought provoking posts
in response to these posts is going just a little too far.
I personally have been using "Alternative" treatments (ie herbs) with the
full and complete approval of my oncologist. I would never subject my body
to another method of treatment without understanding how it may react to my
regular treatments of chemo (maybe we are a little more progressive up here
in Canada). I have also done a great deal of investigation into the effects
of these herbs before taking them.
My mother wears a copper bracelet because she feels that it helps with her
arthritis. Who am I to disclaim or discredit how she "perceives" it to help
her. The same goes for any other form of non-invasive therapy. If somebody
obtains relief by using magnets, then by all means use them. They won’t
cause any harm and they may not do any good – BUT if the person believes
that it gives them some relief then what is the harm.
HOWEVER … when somebody makes a statement that these treatments can cure
any number of diseases or that the medical community is standing together to
banish these cures, then the red flags should go up. My oncologist (and I
imaging most if not all of the others) would celebrate the day that an
absolute cure was found for cancer. The same can be said for those doctors
working with all horrific diseases. ANYBODY that states otherwise is living
in a world void of reality. We humans are a clumsy and careless bunch, and
will continue to keep doctors busy all day long.
So go ahead and post information about alternative treatments, but don’t
make outlandish claims without providing reliable scientific information –
not some obscure study from some off shore medical clinic that nobody has
ever heard of.
Stephen Hall
Still here thanks to the medical community.
Stephen,
Thak you for a sensible post.
Personally, I would not want to see discussion of alternatives "banned" from
this newsgroup. There are many more things we don’t know than things we
know.
I think the oncologists who post here (if I can speak for them – maybe I
can’t) object to rather more specific things than discussion of
alternatives. The following spring to mind:
1) People selling stuff
2) Especially when they make outlandish unproven claims about efficacy
3) Especially when those claims are accompanied by polemic about the medical
mafia, conspiracy theories and offers to save cancer patients from"slash,
poison and burn"
4) Especially when they are accompanied by puerile crudities.
My greatest concern, as always, is that people with curable tumours will
avoid effective conventional treatment until they have realised the
inefficacy of the get-cured-quick-and-painless diet-this and magnet-that. By
that time, they may be considerably poorer, disillusioned, and worst of all,
may have passed from a curable to an incurable stage of their disease.
"Stephen Hall" <s_hall…@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Dcfc4.2238$G55.27581@news1.rdc1.ab.home.com…
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> I can’t believe some of the posts on this newsgroup these days. Sure there
> may be some people posting some "unusual" or "questionable" treatments for
> cancer, but do we really need to stoop so low as to make personal attacks.
> Even attacking Dr Roda when he makes intelligent and thought provoking
posts
> in response to these posts is going just a little too far.
> I personally have been using "Alternative" treatments (ie herbs) with the
> full and complete approval of my oncologist. I would never subject my body
> to another method of treatment without understanding how it may react to
my
> regular treatments of chemo (maybe we are a little more progressive up
here
> in Canada). I have also done a great deal of investigation into the
effects
> of these herbs before taking them.
> My mother wears a copper bracelet because she feels that it helps with her
> arthritis. Who am I to disclaim or discredit how she "perceives" it to
help
> her. The same goes for any other form of non-invasive therapy. If somebody
> obtains relief by using magnets, then by all means use them. They won’t
> cause any harm and they may not do any good – BUT if the person believes
> that it gives them some relief then what is the harm.
> HOWEVER … when somebody makes a statement that these treatments can cure
> any number of diseases or that the medical community is standing together
to
> banish these cures, then the red flags should go up. My oncologist (and I
> imaging most if not all of the others) would celebrate the day that an
> absolute cure was found for cancer. The same can be said for those doctors
> working with all horrific diseases. ANYBODY that states otherwise is
living
> in a world void of reality. We humans are a clumsy and careless bunch, and
> will continue to keep doctors busy all day long.
> So go ahead and post information about alternative treatments, but don’t
> make outlandish claims without providing reliable scientific information –
> not some obscure study from some off shore medical clinic that nobody has
> ever heard of.
> Stephen Hall
> Still here thanks to the medical community.
My personal "red flag" is those who claim that some physician, under attack by
the medical community, has THE cure.
Given that cancer is a complex disease of disordered cellular regulation,
immunity, etc. I doubt there will ever be just ONE cure.
I also don’t believe that there’s a conspiracy of doc/FDA/etc. I will look at
anything reasonable that might help my patients. After all, many of my
chemotherapeutic drugs started out as plant extracts (periwinkle=vincrisitine,
yew plant = taxanes, etc.). But I define reasonable on the basis of evidence,
not polemic. For example, PCSPES was touted as the cure for prostate cancer. It
turns out, one (if not the major) active ingredient is estrogen. Estrogen works
as the initial therapy of prostate cancer — but it works no differently if
provided in herbal form than in tablet form; and ultimately most prostate
cancers become resistant to it. Thus, if I have a patient who wants PCSPES in
addition to radiation or radical surgery, I can explain what they’re taking.
My other red flag is advertisements in the forms of letters. The internet is
fine for selling — make up a web page. Newsgroups are for discussions. I’m not
selling — I want patients to find competent physicians in their communities. I
don’t think anyone should constantly post ads for medications, magnets, etc. But
I know of no way to forbid it (beyond ignoring these messages).
DISCLAIMER:
Please read the following disclaimer. Reading the entire message indicates
acceptance of the following:
Please note that all contents of this message, including any advice,
suggestions, and/or recommendations has NOT been generated as
part of any professional evaluation. No patient has been examined prior to
making these comments; no professional fee has been
charged by or paid to myself. The reader is advised to discuss these comments
with his/her personal physicians and to only act upon
the advice of his/her personal physician.
Note that in answering an electronicly posted question, I am NOT creating a
physician — patient relationship. Medical
recommendations & advise can only be generated after a complete (in person)
physical examination and review of the patients
history.
As I can not control the media, I can not take responsibility for any breaches
of confidentiality that may occur in responding to any
electronic question. Finally, the material produced by myself may be reproduced
for personal use, provided that appropriate credit is
given; but this material may not otherwise be reprinted or reproduced in any
format for any other purpose.
Paul I. Roda, M.D., F.A.C.P
http://www.DoctorsOffice.org/DrRoda.htm
Bravo to the posts from Stephen and Dr Roda.
With respect to the aggressive promotion of Haelan fermented soy on this
newsgroup, there is a recent study of 30 PC patients by PCRI that shows a
benefit from fermented soy, although from a different supplier. If the haelan
person was less huckster and more substance, we might get an intelligent
discussion of the soy issue.
Rolf Westgard
PC patient
Terrific answer Dr. Roda. We are fortunate to have you participate on this
newsgroup.
Tom Mastin
With no axe to grind, one wayor another
"Paul I. Roda, M.D., F.A.C.P." wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> My personal "red flag" is those who claim that some physician, under attack by
> the medical community, has THE cure.
> Given that cancer is a complex disease of disordered cellular regulation,
> immunity, etc. I doubt there will ever be just ONE cure.
> I also don’t believe that there’s a conspiracy of doc/FDA/etc. I will look at
> anything reasonable that might help my patients. After all, many of my
> chemotherapeutic drugs started out as plant extracts (periwinkle=vincrisitine,
> yew plant = taxanes, etc.). But I define reasonable on the basis of evidence,
> not polemic. For example, PCSPES was touted as the cure for prostate cancer. It
> turns out, one (if not the major) active ingredient is estrogen. Estrogen works
> as the initial therapy of prostate cancer — but it works no differently if
> provided in herbal form than in tablet form; and ultimately most prostate
> cancers become resistant to it. Thus, if I have a patient who wants PCSPES in
> addition to radiation or radical surgery, I can explain what they’re taking.
> My other red flag is advertisements in the forms of letters. The internet is
> fine for selling — make up a web page. Newsgroups are for discussions. I’m not
> selling — I want patients to find competent physicians in their communities. I
> don’t think anyone should constantly post ads for medications, magnets, etc. But
> I know of no way to forbid it (beyond ignoring these messages).
> DISCLAIMER:
> Please read the following disclaimer. Reading the entire message indicates
> acceptance of the following:
> Please note that all contents of this message, including any advice,
> suggestions, and/or recommendations has NOT been generated as
> part of any professional evaluation. No patient has been examined prior to
> making these comments; no professional fee has been
> charged by or paid to myself. The reader is advised to discuss these comments
> with his/her personal physicians and to only act upon
> the advice of his/her personal physician.
> Note that in answering an electronicly posted question, I am NOT creating a
> physician — patient relationship. Medical
> recommendations & advise can only be generated after a complete (in person)
> physical examination and review of the patients
> history.
> As I can not control the media, I can not take responsibility for any breaches
> of confidentiality that may occur in responding to any
> electronic question. Finally, the material produced by myself may be reproduced
> for personal use, provided that appropriate credit is
> given; but this material may not otherwise be reprinted or reproduced in any
> format for any other purpose.
> Paul I. Roda, M.D., F.A.C.P
> http://www.DoctorsOffice.org/DrRoda.htm
Let’s talk a little about red flags. If you don’t have something that
is effective, but want to make a lot of money, you come up with some
secret mix, or some patented gadget to do the job, and it is something
that others cannot reasonably duplicate.
Then you promote the hell out of it.
You charge a lot of money.
But what are you supposed to do if your research takes you to something
that anyone can duplicate very cheaply, but because it is how the
healing job is done in nature, works great?
Are you supposed to shut up because someone will call you a spammer?
I have written here before about Dr. Philpott, because he writes the
most logical, well thought out explanations as to how magnet therepy
should be used and why it works. As he consults with over 100 doctors
he has feedback as to how a lot of cases have gone. he is collecting
data for an FDA approved and supervised clinical study.
And, he can put someone in contact with a doctor perhaps not so far away
who can provide this treatment. He also has a book which he sells,
"Cancer, The Bio/Oxygen Solution. At $15, if he is trying to get rich
on this, he just hasn’t gotten the hang of it yet!
He will also sell you magnets (throuh his wife’s involvement with a mag.
distributor), to do the research, and they cost about the same as other
places, but he does not require that you get the magnets from him. They
are not patented, and except for better finish, and pole identification,
are the same as those available from industrial magnet distributors at
somewhat less cost.
A dog (half ger. shep and half pitt bull), I am taking care of recently
had a disagreement and my emergency room and specialist bill came to
around $1000 all in a couple of hours. Even with buying Dr. P’s magnets
as well as getting his $195 (tax ded., through a holistic health
foundation), one time consulting fee, you are looking at the whole thing
as costing less than my dog bite, and the magnets can be reused for
generations.
But if that costs too much, E-mail me and I will tell you how to order
the right magnets from an industrial source.
Dr. Roda suggested that you could apply a magnet to part of your cancer
if it was matastisized,(and compare results with the rest),and if that
is the only way you would want to do this, go for it! At least you will
spend maybe $40 initially instead of more, if you are only treating a
single area. But also invest in the book. (Dr. Philpott is in Choctaw,
Oklahoma. He has a fax, and of course a phone, and you can call him, but
he has no E-mail)
I cannot see why someone who has a cancer which has a poor prognosis, or
is in an inoperable location, would not go for this! There are other
benefits besides a cure to be had, which alone justify the use of
magnets. Why sit around and wonder? Just make sure you do it right and
give it a try, and afterwards be sure and tell your doctor (from the
beginning and remember magnets are not harmful per. the FDA (if
correctly used), and even if he doesn’t think they will work, he should
not try to stop you. It is your life, don’t forget. Tell the Dr. the
results, too, and tell us!
And something else: Remember that this therapy does not conflict with
any chemo or radiation or other medication you receive! You do not have
to give up the thing the Dr. says is your only hope inorder to add this.
Certainly this will not give you a clear answer, but it may very well
give you a better outcome than not using magnetic therapy.
(As I have said before, the best single book giving the whole background
on magnetic therapy around the world, incl. different doctgors
approaches, and results, a very well researched book, is "Discovery of
Magnetic Health," by Washnis. I don’t know the man, and I get nothing
from plugging his book. You library should be able to get if for you.
I am about to pick up a far rarer book on mag. therapy from my library
today.
When I started with the MLM co. Nikken, 10 yrs ago, everyone thought our
magnets were bunk. Now the problem for the Nikken people is that you
can buy a lot of what they sell in Wallmart! I got out of Nikken early
on, and dug into this science much deeper, and now I am waiting for the
day that there will be a common appreciation re. the proper use of
magnetic fields for cancer (and much more), just as now there is for
pain.
Bob Johnson. 10 yrs. biomagnetic study. No products to sell.
Tom Mastin <tomm…@aloha.net> wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> Terrific answer Dr. Roda. We are fortunate to have you participate on
this
> newsgroup.
> Tom Mastin
> With no axe to grind, one wayor another
> "Paul I. Roda, M.D., F.A.C.P." wrote:
> > My personal "red flag" is those who claim that some physician, under
attack by
> > the medical community, has THE cure.
> > Given that cancer is a complex disease of disordered cellular
regulation,
> > immunity, etc. I doubt there will ever be just ONE cure.
> > I also don’t believe that there’s a conspiracy of doc/FDA/etc. I
will look at
> > anything reasonable that might help my patients. After all, many of
my
> > chemotherapeutic drugs started out as plant extracts
(periwinkle=vincrisitine,
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> > yew plant = taxanes, etc.). But I define reasonable on the basis of
evidence,
> > not polemic. For example, PCSPES was touted as the cure for prostate
cancer. It
> > turns out, one (if not the major) active ingredient is estrogen.
Estrogen works
> > as the initial therapy of prostate cancer — but it works no
differently if
> > provided in herbal form than in tablet form; and ultimately most
prostate
> > cancers become resistant to it. Thus, if I have a patient who wants
PCSPES in
> > addition to radiation or radical surgery, I can explain what they’re
taking.
> > My other red flag is advertisements in the forms of letters. The
internet is
> > fine for selling — make up a web page. Newsgroups are for
discussions. I’m not
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> > selling — I want patients to find competent physicians in their
communities. I
> > don’t think anyone should constantly post ads for medications,
magnets, etc. But
> > I know of no way to forbid it (beyond ignoring these messages).
> > DISCLAIMER:
> > Please read the following disclaimer. Reading the entire message
indicates
> > acceptance of the following:
> > Please note that all contents of this message, including any advice,
> > suggestions, and/or recommendations has NOT been generated as
> > part of any professional evaluation. No patient has been examined
prior to
> > making these comments; no professional fee has been
> > charged by or paid to myself. The reader is advised to discuss these
comments
> > with his/her personal physicians and to only act upon
> > the advice of his/her personal physician.
> > Note that in answering an electronicly posted question, I am NOT
creating a
> > physician — patient relationship. Medical
> > recommendations & advise can only be generated after a complete (in
person)
> > physical examination and review of the patients
> > history.
> > As I can not control the media, I can not take responsibility for
any breaches
> > of confidentiality that may occur in responding to any
> > electronic question. Finally, the material produced by myself may be
reproduced
> > for personal use, provided that appropriate credit is
> > given; but this material may not otherwise be reprinted or
reproduced in any
> > format for any other purpose.
> > Paul I. Roda, M.D., F.A.C.P
> > http://www.DoctorsOffice.org/DrRoda.htm
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
medi…@my-deja.com wrote:
> Dr. Roda suggested that you could apply a magnet to part of your cancer
> if it was matastisized,(and compare results with the rest),and if that
> is the only way you would want to do this, go for it! At least you will
> spend maybe $40 initially instead of more, if you are only treating a
> single area. But also invest in the book. (Dr. Philpott is in Choctaw,
> Oklahoma. He has a fax, and of course a phone, and you can call him, but
> he has no E-mail)
Quote me correctly — what I said was that a research study could be done by
placing a magnet over one cutanious metastasis and a placebo wt of similar
size over another, then comparing the two. Or treat paired animals with
magnets vs. placebo. In either case the idea is the test, in a defined
fashion, the hypothesis that magnetic fields affected cancer.
DISCLAIMER:
Please read the following disclaimer. Reading the entire message indicates
acceptance of the following:
Please note that all contents of this message, including any advice,
suggestions, and/or recommendations has NOT been generated as
part of any professional evaluation. No patient has been examined prior to
making these comments; no professional fee has been
charged by or paid to myself. The reader is advised to discuss these
comments with his/her personal physicians and to only act upon
the advice of his/her personal physician.
Note that in answering an electronicly posted question, I am NOT creating a
physician — patient relationship. Medical
recommendations & advise can only be generated after a complete (in person)
physical examination and review of the patients
history.
As I can not control the media, I can not take responsibility for any
breaches of confidentiality that may occur in responding to any
electronic question. Finally, the material produced by myself may be
reproduced for personal use, provided that appropriate credit is
given; but this material may not otherwise be reprinted or reproduced in any
format for any other purpose.
Paul I. Roda, M.D., F.A.C.P
http://www.DoctorsOffice.org/DrRoda.htm
In article <Dcfc4.2238$G55.27…@news1.rdc1.ab.home.com>,
"Stephen Hall" <s_hall…@hotmail.com> wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> I can’t believe some of the posts on this newsgroup these days. Sure
there
> may be some people posting some "unusual" or "questionable" treatments
for
> cancer, but do we really need to stoop so low as to make personal
attacks.
> Even attacking Dr Roda when he makes intelligent and thought provoking
posts
> in response to these posts is going just a little too far.
> I personally have been using "Alternative" treatments (ie herbs) with
the
> full and complete approval of my oncologist. I would never subject my
body
> to another method of treatment without understanding how it may react
to my
> regular treatments of chemo (maybe we are a little more progressive up
here
> in Canada). I have also done a great deal of investigation into the
effects
> of these herbs before taking them.
> My mother wears a copper bracelet because she feels that it helps with
her
> arthritis. Who am I to disclaim or discredit how she "perceives" it to
help
> her. The same goes for any other form of non-invasive therapy. If
somebody
> obtains relief by using magnets, then by all means use them. They
won’t
> cause any harm and they may not do any good – BUT if the person
believes
> that it gives them some relief then what is the harm.
> HOWEVER … when somebody makes a statement that these treatments can
cure
> any number of diseases or that the medical community is standing
together to
> banish these cures, then the red flags should go up. My oncologist
(and I
> imaging most if not all of the others) would celebrate the day that an
> absolute cure was found for cancer. The same can be said for those
doctors
> working with all horrific diseases. ANYBODY that states otherwise is
living
> in a world void of reality. We humans are a clumsy and careless bunch,
and
> will continue to keep doctors busy all day long.
> So go ahead and post information about alternative treatments, but
don’t
> make outlandish claims without providing reliable scientific
information –
> not some obscure study from some off shore medical clinic that nobody
has
> ever heard of.
> Stephen Hall
> Still here thanks to the medical community.
> Your are so right Stephen…
My sister came up with a maligne lymphoma or (non-hodgskin’s desease)
last year and her doctor advised her to do the same thing you are
acutally doing (herbs or anything pertaining to vegetables). I came up
with a book by Carlson Wade’s , a fact book on Bee Pollen and your
Health… so I went through the internet trying to find more on this
marvelous supplement… it brought me to this site:
http://ubeebealthy2.hypermart.net
From there I bought a bottle so that I could send to my sister after I
had read about the POTENTIATION of bee pollen and why it was so
different… Today, my sister is taking the POTENTIATED BEE POLLEN…
she believe it can make her better physically and emotionally… She
brought the bottle to her doctor and he said it would make to harm.
I recommend the site and also the book by Doctor C. Wade.
Jean Roger
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
While some of these alternative treatments could owe more to placebo than
actual effect, what’s wrong with that? We should be using the placebo effect
to our advantage instead of always trying to eliminate it – it shows the body’s
ability to heal itself by means that are as yet unknown to us.
L.
In article <20000110205909.03560.00001…@ng-fx1.aol.com>,
lynn…@aol.com (LynnLLH) wrote:
> While some of these alternative treatments could owe more to placebo
than
> actual effect, what’s wrong with that? We should be using the placebo
effect
> to our advantage instead of always trying to eliminate it – it shows
the body’s
> ability to heal itself by means that are as yet unknown to us.
> L.
I agree, if it lasts. I reported that the Albert Roy DAvis experiments
on rats in which they implanted cancers was better than 70%, but I was
going by memory and wanted to be sure. Now I reread and see it was 90%.
It is hard to understand how they respond to the placebo efrffectg.
I am old enough to remember "Francis, the Talking Horse," so it is
perhaps easier for me to accept that this is working at Santa Anita,
where 50% of trainers are using magnets, not for cancers certainly, but
for other things that our good doctors have long said they won’t work
for.
The placebo effect apparently works about 13% of the time according to
U.S. studies, or 17% accorfding to Japanese studies.
If you get a far better cure rate, it is time to find out why it works
(or at least personally confirm that it does), and not try to shoot it
down.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Rolf, the test you talk about were with Ecogen. Ecogen used Haelan 851
for that test. The terms 851 and 951 were pattened by Haelan. Ecogen as
in transition and for 2 1/2 years used our 851. As far as Haelan being
aggressively promoted, I have posted http://www.wellbeingjournal/haelan.htm on
the board. This is an article written about Haelan by an independent
medical journalist in the Well Being Journal for their Jan 99 issue. I
think tell people to contact me if they have any question. If you have
no question, you would never hear from me. What is aggressive is the way
people are attacking me, now that I will agree with.
I just read your post (below). Some of what you say I agree with,
but you also say, in so many words, that if something (in this case
a cancer treatment), is too remarkable in its results, it should be
ignored by the person who knows about it. I am glad the Wright
Bros. and so many other inventors and scientists who changed this
world were not governed by this fear.
I incidentaly, your mother’s copper bracelet probably helps her a
bit by helping the body to receive more magnetic influence from the
earth, and you have probably been cured of cancer you never knew
about many times by the same energy, partly from the earth, and
partly produced by your body through oxidation.
I have no interest in the clinic I mentioned. It has advertised on
the back cover of Alternative Medicine mag. for several months. I
thought this forum was to give info others didn’t know about. Am I
supposed to wait until a lot of other people know?
Last night I was reading about the animal studies by Albert Roy
Davis, which covered several years, and involved thousands of rats,
mice, etc., and was replicated by other scientists around the world.
As I have no scanner, I am simply going to send a copy of that part
of the book, plus the acknowledgements section to Dr. Roda. That
section lists these doctors and you quickly get the picture that
this was not some obscure effort than no one else was aware of or
involved in, and certianly there was no way the results could have
been false, because of the prestigeous people who were aware of the
work either by visits to the lab, or who replicated it in their
labs.
As I said before, if any phar. co. had gotten such results against
cancer they would have rushed headlong to get their medicine
approved, but this is not a medicine that can be patented and a co.
can make big bucks on. This is something that the body uses for a
variety of tasks and indeed, we would die instantaneously if somehow
it were removed from our bodies. It is also something we are
receiving less and less of. The earth has had its poles flip
various times in the past, and it certainly looks like we are
heading there again. This comes after the earth’s magnetic field
decreases to a low point. And that decrease in its extreme, will
produce a situation that will not support life.
It is hard for doctors to accept something that has such far
reaching benefits as the use of magnetic fields. But oxygen, for
instance, has far reaching benefits, (but we would know if we were
not getting enough of it). This one has slipped up on us, no. 1
because we are not fully aware of its importantce, and no 2, because
the decline (5% in the past 100 years, 50% in the last 500 to 1000
yrs), is not noticeable, although it is very rapid in terms of the
geologic history of the earth.
I am sorry if you feel I have attacked Dr. Roda. I hope he does not
feel that way. I have stated here that I greatly appreciate his
efforts.
I did bring up one of the (many) important benefits of the negative
magnetic field in that it will renew the natural magnetic charge on
the cortex of red blood cells. It is natural for doctors and others
to think this is bunk and to grasp for the first explanation they
think of to disprove. Dr. Roda said if you put this charge on the
cell it would magnetize on one side, and not over the entire cortex
(with the opposite polarity being inside). This is something he
simply did not know about. (Like maybe Dr. Philpott who is retired
neurophsychiatrist does know know all the terminology of oncology.)
But not just RBC’s but apparently all cells have this magnetic
arrangement. With the RBC’s as they age the magnetic charge wanes
and they are succeptible to sticking to other RBC’s which are in the
same shape. These cells will be gobbled up by macrophages ( a vtype
of white blood cell), eventually, but in the meantime they can clump
together and lead to a stroke, and strokes are a leading cause of
death among cancer patients.
Most doctors do not pay attention to such ideas as they don’t come
from the sources they are used to, like pharma salesmen and med.
journals. People are afraid to be ridiculed than to do something
important and positive. Its the usual situation, and only the few
go against it, and this has been the way through history.
With the system we have, something that can be profitable has a far
greater chance to be used in therapy than some simple thing that no
one can make any serious money with. I guess the Cell Specific
Cancer Treatment Centers has found a way to do this. I hope they
get 50 centers going, and have 200 competitors.
Maybe then it will not be too outrageous to post on these pages.
In article <Dcfc4.2238$G55.27…@news1.rdc1.ab.home.com>,
"Stephen Hall" <s_hall…@hotmail.com> wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> I can’t believe some of the posts on this newsgroup these days. Sure there
> may be some people posting some "unusual" or "questionable" treatments for
> cancer, but do we really need to stoop so low as to make personal attacks.
> Even attacking Dr Roda when he makes intelligent and thought provoking posts
> in response to these posts is going just a little too far.
> I personally have been using "Alternative" treatments (ie herbs) with the
> full and complete approval of my oncologist. I would never subject my body
> to another method of treatment without understanding how it may react to my
> regular treatments of chemo (maybe we are a little more progressive up here
> in Canada). I have also done a great deal of investigation into the effects
> of these herbs before taking them.
> My mother wears a copper bracelet because she feels that it helps with her
> arthritis. Who am I to disclaim or discredit how she "perceives" it to help
> her. The same goes for any other form of non-invasive therapy. If somebody
> obtains relief by using magnets, then by all means use them. They won’t
> cause any harm and they may not do any good – BUT if the person believes
> that it gives them some relief then what is the harm.
> HOWEVER … when somebody makes a statement that these treatments can cure
> any number of diseases or that the medical community is standing together to
> banish these cures, then the red flags should go up. My oncologist (and I
> imaging most if not all of the others) would celebrate the day that an
> absolute cure was found for cancer. The same can be said for those doctors
> working with all horrific diseases. ANYBODY that states otherwise is living
> in a world void of reality. We humans are a clumsy and careless bunch, and
> will continue to keep doctors busy all day long.
> So go ahead and post information about alternative treatments, but don’t
> make outlandish claims without providing reliable scientific information –
> not some obscure study from some off shore medical clinic that nobody has
> ever heard of.
> Stephen Hall
> Still here thanks to the medical community.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Group: sci.med.diseases.cancer Date: Sat, Jan 8, 2000, 5:27pm (PST+8)
From: el…@aol.com (Elva4)
My husband drank one bottle of Haelan 85 from China, everyday, and then
from Louisiana, Haelan 95 for a total of nine months @ $30.00 a day.
Also had the conventional treatments of chemo and radiation. He passed
away from lung cancer May 9, 1998 . It was too good to be true when we
saw the video of what this product does in just a week or so…..we fell
for it and also emptied our bank account in the process. But when
dealing with cancer, you feel you are darned if you do and darned if you
don`t. And it`s just the way it is. We want to do everything for our
loved one. But people trying to make a fortune should not take advantage
of someone desperate. IMHO
Elva
Group: sci.med.diseases.cancer Date: Fri, Jan 14, 2000, 8:50am (PST+3)
From: Gal…@webtv.net (WillIam Samueli) Re: Is this now
sci.med.spammer.cancer ?
Rolf, the test you talk about were with Ecogen. Ecogen used Haelan 851
for that test. The terms 851 and 951 were pattened by Haelan. Ecogen as
in transition and for 2 1/2 years used our 851. As far as Haelan being
aggressively promoted, I have posted http://www.wellbeing/journalhaelan.htm on
the board. This is an article written about Haelan by an independent
medical journalist in the Well Being Journal for their Jan 99 issue. I
think tell people to contact me if they have any question. If you have
no question, you would never hear from me. What is aggressive is the way
people are attacking me, now that I will agree with.
In article <29361-387F5ACD…@storefull-272.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
NGM…@webtv.net (Mr Usenet) wrote:
> Group: sci.med.diseases.cancer Date: Sat, Jan 8, 2000, 5:27pm (PST+8)
> From: el…@aol.com (Elva4)
> My husband drank one bottle of Haelan 85 from China, everyday, and then
> from Louisiana, Haelan 95 for a total of nine months @ $30.00 a day.
> Also had the conventional treatments of chemo and radiation. He passed
> away from lung cancer May 9, 1998 . It was too good to be true when we
> saw the video of what this product does in just a week or so…..we fell
> for it and also emptied our bank account in the process. But when
> dealing with cancer, you feel you are darned if you do and darned if you
> don`t. And it`s just the way it is. We want to do everything for our
If something is very expensive AND it is not FDA approved, that
should be enough for someone to steer away! One thing that makes
new ethical pharmaceuticals so expensive is the (literally) millions
of dollars that testing for FDA approval costs. >
But something like this seems a lot sexier than what I have been
talking about, which is something invisable which is decreasing
alarmingly, but most don’t realize this and most don’t realize that
it is essential to life and there are serious consequences as the
amount of it condinues to diminish.
I have been called a spammer, etc. I do this for no profit at all.
Most of us, if we were seeing someone drowning, would try to throw
tham a rope. You try to help in the way you can best, and as I know
about what the proper application of magnetic fields can do, this is
my contribution.
There is scant way for this to be a scam. I will be glad to tell
anyone how to get industrial magnets (and which ones to ask for),
for use in cancer treatment and much more.
The animal studies done in Florida and around the world in the
fifties, sixties and early seventies justify the government and
foundations investing in controlled tests. But it hasn’t happened.
The success of the Russians in treating cancer with magnetic fields
again justifies our side investigating. Money, or pride, should not
prevent people from getting a therapy which can cure them (or assist
something else in curing), without side effects or dangers, and
ridiculously cheap.
Any cure which does not take into consideration the cause, and also
correct that, is a stopgap cure, and is not the end answer.
I agree, it is very hard to understand how this have been ignored so
far. It is a testiment to a combination of wrong perception, and
lack of financial incentive. There are as many opinions as to why
this can’t work, as there are people speculating, but few indeed are
prepared to find out, and spread the word about what they found.
This is a classic example of "If you are not part of the solution,
you are part of the problem."
As I have said many times, the best overview of this subject can be
found in the book "Discovery of Magnetic Health." This is not by
some doctor who is promoting his own slant. Someone did a marvelous
job of researching and getting to the bottom of things, and this
book covers digests of the therapies of the leading doctors in this
field, gives all the arguements, and is very informative. The
library in my little town has it, and I am sure yours can at least
order it in from another lib. for you. Of course the book deals
with far more than cancer, as this is something as necessary to
virtually all parts of body functions as things like oxygen, and it
all needs to be explained. There are few conditions you cannot
improve or prevent utilizing this, and it is something a person can
do himself if he cannot find a doctor near enough to help. It does
not conflict with other therapies; another remarkable thing.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
In article <29361-387F5ACD…@storefull-272.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
NGM…@webtv.net (Mr Usenet) wrote:
> Group: sci.med.diseases.cancer Date: Sat, Jan 8, 2000, 5:27pm (PST+8)
> From: el…@aol.com (Elva4)
> My husband drank one bottle of Haelan 85 from China, everyday, and then
> from Louisiana, Haelan 95 for a total of nine months @ $30.00 a day.
> Also had the conventional treatments of chemo and radiation. He passed
> away from lung cancer May 9, 1998 . It was too good to be true when we
> saw the video of what this product does in just a week or so…..we fell
> for it and also emptied our bank account in the process. But when
> dealing with cancer, you feel you are darned if you do and darned if you
> don`t. And it`s just the way it is. We want to do everything for our
> loved one. But people trying to make a fortune should not take advantage
> of someone desperate. IMHO
I agree. But also someone desperate should try to calm down, and
analyze the proposition. It’s not that easy to do, but we should
try to figure out when emotion has hold of us.
A clue to a scam is the price. They do not have the expensive FDA
testing to pay for, and if their product is really good, and is not
patentable, (if it is patentable and good, then they will get the
FDA testing done), it will be duplicated by competitors and the
price will come way down.
At best, maybe a few of these nostrums have had marginal, unclear
benefits.
The thing I have been trying to tell people about is not expensive.
It cannot be patented, and no co. will ever pay for FDA testing. We
have to become aware of what it will do to the point that the NIH
with its miscule appropriations will test, or private foundations
will.
Russia didn’t need this. They have developed successful therapies
using equipment which generates magnetic fields to treat cancer. But
I guess that for purposes of deciding on research, maybe the
Russians do not qualify as humans. I am not sure I understand it.
I would have thought that years of succcessful animal testing, with
90% cure results, replicated around the world, would have been
enough! That is the stupid belief in the abilities and motivations
of or medical establishment which I have!
(For those who have not read my "spam" before, the testing was
completed in the seventies. After a 16 yr. wait results were
published ina minor peer reviewed journal. A few doctors picked up
on this and got good "anecdotal results." (Why not give it a try?
It is safe, there are no side effects, and it is cheap, and you can
always go back to tghe other therapy).
Usually we understand things like deficiencies. People buy all
sorts of supplements. But it is hard to understand supplementing
for something invisable, which normally comes from the earth, (but
less has been coming). We are at 1/10th the mag. strength we had
4000 years ago (when people were pretty physical). It is
reasonable to imagine that we cannot adjust for such a rapid decline
in something we need. Why do whe know we need it? It has been
proved raising rats in a magnetically insullatged enclosure, and by
cosmonaujts and astronauts on long flights (away from the earth’s
magnetic field). First it was thought the problem was
weightlessness, but now the space ships have artificial magnetic
sources to correct.
How do we know? Because when many degenerative conditions are
treated with this, they are helped or cured. The Japanese first
came up. with the anser in 1976, after extensive hospital tests, and
they called the problem "magnetic field deficiency syndrome."
Every expert has a different reason why this surely cannot be right.
One of the latest I heard was that part of the theory, that over
acidity (in simple terms), which some who use magnetic fields clain
is associated with cancer, (and something corrected by the
negative/south seeking magnetic field), is not a valid consideration
because it was way back in 1931 when someone got a Nobel prize for
the discovery (so it must be outdated).
Everyone thinks if it is so simple "someone" would figure it out and
use it. A few do, but most do not.
I suggest "Discovery of Magnetic Health," as the best overview. The
book is in libraries. It has the names of various doctors, and
digests of their therapies. I used such a source as this to contact
three leading authorities in the field, and get more info from all.
One of them, Dr. Philpott, of Choctaw, OK, will suggest a doctor
nearest to you who has worked with him on this before.
On the back covery of "Alternative Medicine" magazine is an ad for
clinics outside the U.S which use magnetic therapy to reduce the
tumor burden and other therapies to keep one cancer free.
I hope anyone who investigates this further and who gets results,
good or bad, will report it here, and to their doctors.
10 years ago most people would think you were crazy for suggested a
magnet could be useful for pain, but now there is an awareness and
many successful products on the market. I am wondering, will it
take 10 or 20 years for people to start saving their lives with
this?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
"Paul I. Roda, M.D., F.A.C.P." <paulr…@epix.net> wrote:
>Speaking for the Pro was a plastic surgeon who noted that
> magnetic placement seemed to relieve postoperative pain and the pain
of
> some rheumatologic conditions (fibromyalga). The Con opinion noted
that
> the strength of these magnets was quite low (compared for example, to
> MRI magnets) and that there was little or no GOOD data in more serious
> conditions.
Just one little point here, one modern approach to magnotherapy
considers the field gradient much more important than the field
strength.
> For cancer patients, it appears that magnets might have some value in
> reducing pain, but there hasn’t been any controlled studies in
patients
> with cancer.
Another possible use is to aid in removing chemotherapy from the body
after treatment. There is anecdotal evidence that magnotherapy can
reduce the side effects of chemotherapy for some patients. However it
should not be used during the chemotherapy treatments or for 2 hours
after.
The study on lung cancer I posted,
Morphological criteria of lung cancer regression under the effect of
magnetotherapy
Ogorodnikova LS; Ga¨irabed’iants NG; Ratner ON; Chirvina ED; S´em LD
Vopr Onkol, 26(1):28-34 1980
suggests that magnotherapy may be useful prior to surgery, chemotherapy
and radiation treatment. Further study is needed to check this.
However no-one has suggested that magnotherapy has any harmful effects
so far.
> In the meantime, if you want to use a magnet to supplement standard
> therapy, just don’t spend massive amounts on the magnets and don’t
have
> unrealistic hopes.
Absolutely agree. Magnotherapy should only be used to complement
existing therapy with the agreemant of your doctor. If you are buying
magnotherapy devices, make sure you get a good money back guarantee.
Magnotherapy does not work for everyone.
Best wishes
—
John Bain
UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor
http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html
Surround Sound for Television
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
"John Bain" <JBai…@aol.com> wrote some very reasonable stuff and then
spoiled it for me by writing:
> Another possible use is to aid in removing chemotherapy from the body
> after treatment
Come on, John. Which kinds of chemotherapy persist in the body after
treatment? All? Some? How long do they persist? What mechanism can magnet
therapy invoke to "remove" it?
John Bain wrote:
> Another possible use is to aid in removing chemotherapy from the body
> after treatment. There is anecdotal evidence that magnotherapy can
> reduce the side effects of chemotherapy for some patients. However it
> should not be used during the chemotherapy treatments or for 2 hours
> after.
The body uses a plethora of mechanisms to remove chemicals from the
circulation. This includes metabolisms and excretion through the kidneys.
Which kinds of mechanism of elimination would magnets produce? Note that it
is a fairly straightforward test to measure drug levels after
administration. This kind of data is required (in animals) before human
studies can be started and again in humans before a drug is approved. If
magnets remove chemotherapy from a body one could simply take two groups of
lab rats, give one the standard drug and the other the standard drug and
place in a magnetic field. Measure body levels of the drugs and show that
the drug is more rapidly removed from the magnet exposed animals.
Also you advise waiting for two hours. Since many chemotherapeutic agents
must enter a cell and alter cellular metabolisms, most rescue agents
(leucovorin for methotrexate, filgrastin for neutropenia, etc.) aren’t given
for at least 24 hours after chemotherapy exposure. If one wears a magnet and
gets chemo, don’t put the magnet on until the next day.
Snip discussion>
> Absolutely agree. Magnotherapy should only be used to complement
> existing therapy with the agreemant of your doctor. If you are buying
> magnotherapy devices, make sure you get a good money back guarantee.
> Magnotherapy does not work for everyone.
> Best wishes
> —
> John Bain
> UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor
> http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html
> Surround Sound for Television
For the information of those who have not yet visited Mr Bain’s site one of
the links which he sees fit to include from his site (apparently without
criticism) is to:
<QUOTE>
ALEX CHIU’S ETERNAL LIFE DEVICE .. ENTER HERE
What do you think the rapture is?
Answer: Ones who believe shall not perish and have everlasting life.
Eternal Life Device is believed to allow humans to stay physically young
forever. Patent issued.
The most important invention in human history. PRESS HERE to see proofs.
Alex Chiu knows what causes you to age and hereby discovered a great
solution to stop you from aging.
<ENDQUOTE>
Where Mr Bain links to skeptics of magnotherapy he offers detailed rebuttal
but offers none to the writings of Mr Chiu. I am forced to the conclusion
that he considers an *eternal life device* to be worthy of scientific
credence.
I would be the first to agree that this neither proves or disproves Mr
Bain’s claims for magnotherapy but I think it does give at some indication
of the stringency and value of his scientific judgement.
Ken Campbell
Clinical Information Officer
Leukaemia Research Fund
This post is sent in a private capacity and views expressed
do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.
I am not a clinician, I am a laboratory haematologist by
training.
"Leukaemia Research Fund" <l…@leukaemia.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> For the information of those who have not yet visited Mr Bain’s site
one of
> the links which he sees fit to include from his site (apparently
without
> criticism) is to:
> ALEX CHIU’S ETERNAL LIFE DEVICE .. ENTER HERE
> I would be the first to agree that this neither proves or disproves Mr
> Bain’s claims for magnotherapy but I think it does give at some
indication
> of the stringency and value of his scientific judgement.
I include links to every magnotherapy manufacturer that I have found.
There is not enough room to give a critique for them all, neither have
I time to test all their devices. There are others equally bizarre.
However the sceptics page should be a better indication of
the ‘stringency and value’ of my scientific judgement as compared to
that of the sceptics.
Your area is leukemia research, what comments do you have on the
leukemia magnotherapy studies.
ELF pulsed magnetic fields on survival of leukaemia-prone AKR mice.
Bellossi A; Bernard-Griffiths I; Le Gall M
Address Laboratoire de Biophysique, Facult´e de M´edecine, Rennes,
France.
Source In Vivo, 2(5):335-7 1988 Sep-Oct
Abstract
In a previous experiment an increase in the survival time of leukaemia-
prone AKR mice was observed by exposure to a 600 mT or 800 mT static
magnetic field when the mice were at least 200 days old. In this
experiment 200-day-old-mice were exposed to a 6 mT pulsed magnetic
field (PMF) for 30 minutes a day, twice a week until death. The
frequency of the field was 12 Hz or 460 Hz. The exposed mice died from
leukaemia but had an increased survival time; the average increase was
14.25% compared to the controls. Both the frequencies gave similar
results.
Best wishes
—
John Bain
UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor
http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html
Surround Sound for Television
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
"Steph" <St…@vancouver.island> wrote:
> "John Bain" <JBai…@aol.com> wrote some very reasonable stuff and
then
> spoiled it for me by writing:
> > Another possible use is to aid in removing chemotherapy from the
body
> > after treatment
> Come on, John. Which kinds of chemotherapy persist in the body after
> treatment? All? Some? How long do they persist? What mechanism can
magnet
> therapy invoke to "remove" it?
I was not suggesting that anything gets ‘stuck’ in the body, just that
magnotherapy on the blood flow seems to increase circulation in the
body which seems to reduce the side effects of chemotherapy. I have
no studies, just anecdotal evidence. The 2 hours after chemotherapy
was quoted by a UK cancer specialist, I’ve no idea how he came by that
figure.
If you doubt the effects of magnotherapy on blood circulation look at
these thermographic camera shots.
http://home1.gte.net/infrared/theramag.htm
Wait till all the photos are downloaded and the pictures animate.
I believe a similar mechanism operates on the lymph system, but I have
no evidence yet.
The point I’m trying to make is that magnotherapy is worth further
study and should not be rejected out of hand.
Best wishes
—
John Bain
UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor
http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html
Surround Sound for Television
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
John Bain <JBai…@aol.com> wrote in message
news:850aqh$f9j$1@nnrp1.deja.com…
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> Your area is leukemia research, what comments do you have on the
> leukemia magnotherapy studies.
> ELF pulsed magnetic fields on survival of leukaemia-prone AKR mice.
> Bellossi A; Bernard-Griffiths I; Le Gall M
> Address Laboratoire de Biophysique, Facult´e de M´edecine, Rennes,
> France.
> Source In Vivo, 2(5):335-7 1988 Sep-Oct
> Abstract
> In a previous experiment an increase in the survival time of leukaemia-
> prone AKR mice was observed by exposure to a 600 mT or 800 mT static
> magnetic field when the mice were at least 200 days old. In this
> experiment 200-day-old-mice were exposed to a 6 mT pulsed magnetic
> field (PMF) for 30 minutes a day, twice a week until death. The
> frequency of the field was 12 Hz or 460 Hz. The exposed mice died from
> leukaemia but had an increased survival time; the average increase was
> 14.25% compared to the controls. Both the frequencies gave similar
> results.
See below – same author, no effect on survival of same mouse strain.
A single 12 year old report with no evidence of replication or of any
further development of the study does not constitute persuasive evidence. It
certainly would not convince me to invest in any form of *magnotherapy*
device if I were a patient. Apart from the question mark over efficacy a
state of affairs in which some groups claim vociferously magnetic fields
cause leukaemia while others equally vociferously promote magnetism as a
panacea for cancer does not inspire confidence.
163
NLM CIT. ID: 92016543
TITLE: Effect of pulsed magnetic fields on leukemia-prone AKR mice.
No-effect
on mortality through five generations.
AUTHORS: Bellossi A
AUTHOR AFFILIATION:
Laboratoire de Biophysique, Faculte de Medecine, Rennes, France.
PUBLICATION TYPES:
JOURNAL ARTICLE
LANGUAGES:
Eng
ABSTRACT:
Leukemia-prone AKR mice were exposed twice a week to a 6 mT, 12 Hz or
460 Hz pulsed magnetic field for 30 min. If we take into account the
five consecutive generations of mice, the above exposure actually
took place in utero and, or during their life span. There was no
difference in the incidence of leukemia or in the actuarial survival
curves or in the average spleen or thymus weights.
NLM PUBMED CIT. ID:
1921450
SOURCE: Leuk Res 1991;15(10):899-902
Ken Campbell
Clinical Information Officer
Leukaemia Research Fund
This post is sent in a private capacity and views expressed
do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.
I am not a clinician, I am a laboratory haematologist by
training.
In article <947154736.13710.0.nnrp-13.c2de4…@news.demon.co.uk>,
"Leukaemia Research Fund" <l…@leukaemia.demon.co.uk> wrote:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> John Bain <JBai…@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:850aqh$f9j$1@nnrp1.deja.com…
> > Your area is leukemia research, what comments do you have on the
> > leukemia magnotherapy studies.
> > ELF pulsed magnetic fields on survival of leukaemia-prone AKR mice.
> > Bellossi A; Bernard-Griffiths I; Le Gall M
> > Address Laboratoire de Biophysique, Facult´e de M´edecine, Rennes,
> > France.
> > Source In Vivo, 2(5):335-7 1988 Sep-Oct
> > Abstract
> > In a previous experiment an increase in the survival time of
leukaemia-
> > prone AKR mice was observed by exposure to a 600 mT or 800 mT static
> > magnetic field when the mice were at least 200 days old. In this
> > experiment 200-day-old-mice were exposed to a 6 mT pulsed magnetic
> > field (PMF) for 30 minutes a day, twice a week until death. The
> > frequency of the field was 12 Hz or 460 Hz. The exposed mice died
from
> > leukaemia but had an increased survival time; the average increase
was
> > 14.25% compared to the controls. Both the frequencies gave similar
> > results.
> See below – same author, no effect on survival of same mouse strain.
> A single 12 year old report with no evidence of replication or of any
> further development of the study does not constitute persuasive
evidence. It
> certainly would not convince me to invest in any form of
*magnotherapy*
> device if I were a patient. Apart from the question mark over efficacy
a
> state of affairs in which some groups claim vociferously magnetic
fields
> cause leukaemia while others equally vociferously promote magnetism as
a
> panacea for cancer does not inspire confidence.
> 163
> NLM CIT. ID: 92016543
> TITLE: Effect of pulsed magnetic fields on leukemia-prone AKR mice.
> No-effect
> on mortality through five generations.
> AUTHORS: Bellossi A
> AUTHOR AFFILIATION:
> Laboratoire de Biophysique, Faculte de Medecine, Rennes, France.
> PUBLICATION TYPES:
> JOURNAL ARTICLE
> LANGUAGES:
> Eng
> ABSTRACT:
> Leukemia-prone AKR mice were exposed twice a week to a 6 mT, 12
Hz or
> 460 Hz pulsed magnetic field for 30 min. If we take into account
the
> five consecutive generations of mice, the above exposure
actually
> took place in utero and, or during their life span. There was no
> difference in the incidence of leukemia or in the actuarial
survival
> curves or in the average spleen or thymus weights.
> NLM PUBMED CIT. ID:
> 1921450
> SOURCE: Leuk Res 1991;15(10):899-902
> Ken Campbell
> Clinical Information Officer
> Leukaemia Research Fund
> This post is sent in a private capacity and views expressed
> do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.
> I am not a clinician, I am a laboratory haematologist by
> training.
The magnedtic fields associated with causing leukemia are from (usually)
high tension electric wires passing near homes where the children lived.
The magnetic fields involved alternated at 60 times a second between
positive and negative. This is covered in many experiments, and the
Bioelectromagnetic Society is doing a lot with this. From a distance,
it seems this is a factor, depending on the strength of exposure and age
of the people involved. Also, it is claimed that exposure to the
negative, d.c. magnetic field can offer protection.
Curing of leukemia with magnets is accomplished by use of this field.
Magnets used are large, and are placed so as to affect the bloodstgream,
as a large magnet in a seat cushion for instance. Neg. poled mattress
pads are used. Negative magnetic or neg. ionized water is used. All
this has nothing (except possibly if this is where you buy your mattress
pad), to do with MLM marketed or ordinary consumer magnetic flex pads,
or bracelets, etc.
It is time for less discussion, and for orgs. like yours to try this out
and see for themselves. People are involved, and they can’t wait. Dr.
Wm. Philpott has consulted with over 100 doctors on cancers and has
results of their works. He supplies treatment protocols and can advise
on results so far. He is located in Choctaw, Oklahoma.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
"Leukaemia Research Fund" <l…@leukaemia.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> John Bain <JBai…@aol.com> wrote in message
> > In a previous experiment an increase in the survival time of
leukaemia-
> > prone AKR mice was observed by exposure to a 600 mT or 800 mT static
> > magnetic field when the mice were at least 200 days old.
> See below – same author, no effect on survival of same mouse strain.
Thanks for that second study, do you also have the previous study, with
the stronger field? I can’t find it on medline.
Did the author make any comments about the different results? The two
studies seem to contradict each other, was there any explanation?
We now have three studiescan you tell me if there are more? My access
to medline is limited and I could only find the one study.
Best wishes
—
John Bain
UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor
http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html
Surround Sound for Television
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
John Bain <JBai…@aol.com> wrote in message
news:852uvr$dcp$1@nnrp1.deja.com…
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> "Leukaemia Research Fund" <l…@leukaemia.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > John Bain <JBai…@aol.com> wrote in message
> > > In a previous experiment an increase in the survival time of
> leukaemia-
> > > prone AKR mice was observed by exposure to a 600 mT or 800 mT static
> > > magnetic field when the mice were at least 200 days old.
> > See below – same author, no effect on survival of same mouse strain.
> Thanks for that second study, do you also have the previous study, with
> the stronger field? I can’t find it on medline.
> Did the author make any comments about the different results? The two
> studies seem to contradict each other, was there any explanation?
> We now have three studiescan you tell me if there are more? My access
> to medline is limited and I could only find the one study.
> Best wishes
> —
John,
I am surprised that you say your access to Medline is limited, the full
content of Medline is avaiable free of charge from source at:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/
A search on Bellossi A, as author finds 87 papers on various aspects of
magnetism but none of these have been published in the last 10 years. There
appears to be no *recent* data and only two papers refer to leukaemia, both
of these relate to an inbred leukaemia-prone strain of mouse. It is always
dubious to extrapolate from such data to *normal* animals.
In summary,
1) I am not persuaded that any convincing evidence has been published that
magnetic fields are either carcinogenic or effective anti-cancer therapy (I
make no claim to be an expert in this field, my training is as a medical
laboratory scientist specialising in haematology),
2) Nothing I have seen or heard on this topic would persuade me to spend
money on any *magnotherapy* device
3) Given that there are those who, as I previously pointed out, claim that
magnetic fields may promote growth of cancer cells I would want to see some
very convincing evidence of a clearly understood and laboratory confirmed
mechanism before I would be willing to subject a tumour to strong magnetic
fields.
I am not seeking to claim expert status and have no intention of being drawn
into a sterile debate so I shall not post further on this topic unless I
feel I have fresh evidence to present.
Ken Campbell
Clinical Information Officer
Leukaemia Research Fund
This post is sent in a private capacity and views expressed
do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.
I am not a clinician, I am a laboratory haematologist by
training.
"Leukaemia Research Fund" <l…@leukaemia.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> 1) I am not persuaded that any convincing evidence has been published
that
> magnetic fields are either carcinogenic or effective anti-cancer
therapy
Agree, I don’t think magnotherapy alone has much effect, but I do
believe it has a ‘catalytic’ action with other therapies and helps them
work more effectively. Personal opinion only.
> 2) Nothing I have seen or heard on this topic would persuade me to
spend
> money on any *magnotherapy* device
I was the same until I had longlasting pain. I tried magnotherapy on
a money back guarantee basis and it worked for me. However
magnotherapy does not work for everyone.
> 3) Given that there are those who, as I previously pointed out, claim
that
> magnetic fields may promote growth of cancer cells I would want to
see some
> very convincing evidence of a clearly understood and laboratory
confirmed
> mechanism before I would be willing to subject a tumour to strong
magnetic
> fields.
MRI subjects tumours to high magnetic fields with no obvious effects,
so it is not the strength of the field that matters.
Asprin took 60 years before the mechanism was understood, yet it was
used as soon as it proved effective.
Best wishes
—
John Bain
UK TV Sound Director, magnotherapy user & distributor
http://members.aol.com/JBainSI/Magnotherapy.html
Surround Sound for Television
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.