Supplemental ascorbate in the supportive treatment of cancer:

Supplemental ascorbate in the supportive treatment of cancer: Prolongation of survival times in terminal human cancer

Ascorbic acid metabolism is associated with a number of mechanisms known to be involved in host resistance to malignant disease. Cancer patients are significantly depleted of ascorbic acid, and in our opinion this demonstrable biochemical characteristic indicates a substantially increased requirement and utilization of this substance to potentiate these various host resistance factors. The results of a clinical trial are presented in which 100 terminal cancer patients were given supplemental ascorbate as part of their routine management. Their progress is compared to that of 1000 similar patients treated identically, but who received no supplementa ascorbate. The mean survival time is more than 4.2 times as great for the ascorbate subjects (more than 210 days) as for the controls (50 days) Analysis of the survival-time curves indicates that deaths occur for about 90% of the ascorbatetreated patients at one-third the rate for the controls and that the other 10% have a much greater survival time, averaging more than 20 times that for the controls. The results clearly indicate that this simple and safe form of medication is of definite value in the treatment of patients with advanced cancer.

Google Scholar

Found this gem dating back to 1976. It was written by Ewan Cameron and the great Linus Pauling. The results speak for themselves. 10 grams of ascorbic acid daily greatly extends the survival lifetime for cancer patients. I count over a dozen types (areas) of cancer treated here. Of course, vitamins can't be patented so I think we all know why this was swept under the rug.

[edit on 5-11-2009 by unityemissions]

Does nobody really find this information of value?! I'm only going to bump this once. If it dies, it dies.

The above information shows a controlled study with 100 ascorbic acid treated individuals, against 1000 control patients. The results are rather staggering. The average survival time is more than four times greater for the ascorbate group.

Originally posted by unityemissions
Does nobody really find this information of value?! I'm only going to bump this once. If it dies, it dies.

The above information shows a controlled study with 100 ascorbic acid treated individuals, against 1000 control patients. The results are rather staggering. The average survival time is more than four times greater for the ascorbate group.

How ironic, then, that Pauling died (albeit at age 93) of prostate cancer.

The same disease I beat with radiation.

Yes, indeed. It's also interesting to note that both of his parents died in his forties, and he made it up into his nineties.

edit for: Eye rolling was uncalled for. Thanks for clarifying your position

[edit on 5-11-2009 by unityemissions]

I find this information extremely valuble as i have cancer and so does my wife's sister.
I will look more into this type of treatment and ask my specialist about it next week when i have another appointment with him.
I had an MRI and a bone scan this week because my treatment last year did not work so this appointment is to see how far the cancer has spread..

This gives me some hope.

Thank you for posting this.

Originally posted by unityemissions
The results are rather staggering. The average survival time is more than four times greater for the ascorbate group.

An example of my family member who takes C confirms that
(we don't want to be a statistic but we are).

Originally posted by unityemissions
Yes, indeed. It's also interesting to note that both of his parents died in his forties, and he made it up into his nineties.

I don't think my comment requires any eye rolling in response. The key to cancer cure remains early detection and treatment. How many people die because 'some guy on the web' convinced them to eschew conventional treatments that cure...as opposed to complementary, alternative, or just plain voodoo that causes them to waste valuable treatment time.

I intend to keep singing that song, and you can roll your eyes, but unless you have danced with the dragon yourself...and beaten it...sonny, you don't know squat.

A self edit to say that anything you can do on the side to help is a good thing. I myself complemented my therapy with naturopathic treatments, but only with the approval of my oncologist...he was the guy on point.

But instead of? Cancer is a crappy way to die, and somehow that ubiquitous 'guy on the net' is never held to account.

[edit on 5-11-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by unityemissions
Yes, indeed. It's also interesting to note that both of his parents died in his forties, and he made it up into his nineties.

I don't think my comment requires any eye rolling in response. The key to cancer cure remains early detection and treatment. How many people die because 'some guy on the web' convinced them to eschew conventional treatments that cure...as opposed to complementary, alternative, or just plain voodoo that causes them to waste valuable treatment time.

I intend to keep singing that song, and you can roll your eyes, but unless you have danced with the dragon yourself...and beaten it...sonny, you don't know squat.

A self edit to say that anything you can do on the side to help is a good thing. I myself complemented my therapy with naturopathic treatments, but only with the approval of my oncologist...he was the guy on point.

But instead of? Cancer is a crappy way to die, and somehow that ubiquitous 'guy on the net' is never held to account.

[edit on 5-11-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]

How many people die because they aren't aware of alternative methods and instead decide to poison their bodies? I don't think either question can be answered.

I think it would be more accurate to say that some cancer patients beat the disease after undergoing radiation and chemo, rather than that it is a cure. Many people die after conventional treatment.

Originally posted by unityemissions
How many people die because they aren't aware of alternative methods and instead decide to poison their bodies? I don't think either question can be answered.

I think it would be more accurate to say that some cancer patients beat the disease after undergoing radiation and chemo, rather than that it is a cure. Many people die after conventional treatment.

I have asked that if anyone of ATS has, themselves, beaten cancer through strictly alternative means, and can produce the paperwork, to please step forward. So far, no takers. There are a number of cancer survivors aboard who went the route of burn/cut/poison, and are cured...and are quite vocal about it.

And your semantics regarding a cure are nonsense. If it worked, it cured you. Yes, may people die after conventional treatment. Wanna know why? Cuz cancer KILLS you. And if comments such as yours keep people from seeking early treatment, then you are aiding and abetting the disease.

And unless you are a cancer survivor yourself, you don't have a lot to offer on the subject.

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by unityemissions
Does nobody really find this information of value?! I'm only going to bump this once. If it dies, it dies.

The above information shows a controlled study with 100 ascorbic acid treated individuals, against 1000 control patients. The results are rather staggering. The average survival time is more than four times greater for the ascorbate group.

How ironic, then, that Pauling died (albeit at age 93) of prostate cancer.

The same disease I beat with radiation.

You must have missed the part in the OP where it says this was a supplemental treatment. These people also had the chemo/ radiation that the control group recieved. And they lived 4 times longer.

I'm glad your prostate cancer got cured. Most people do survive prostate cancer. Most people do not survive lung, ovarian and other more serious cancers, so extension of life in these instances it quite remarkable. Since odds say you are not going to survive these cancers anyways, what real harm is done by seeking alternative methods, especially ones that are proven to be beneficial? I don't get where you are coming from?

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


No I've never had cancer (that I'm aware of). How does this discredit the information of the original article? Let's keep the focus off each other, please.

How many ATS members have seen you call for a first hand report of beating cancer via alternative means? Less than a thousand perhaps? What is the ratio of people who undergo conventional treatment, than those who seek alternative means? I'm thinking it's much greater for conventional treatment.

As I recall just the other day, a member mentioned using antioxidants and other alternative means to cure cancer. Would you like me to rummage through all my previous threads visited lately, find this person, and ask him to contact you or reply to this thread?

Buddhasystem, just above, says he/she can confirm that vitamin c has greatly prolonged a family members rate of survival.

Originally posted by unityemissions
No I've never had cancer (that I'm aware of). How does this discredit the information of the original article? Let's keep the focus off each other, please.

Well, you haven't noticed my using any eye-rolling smilies, have you?

How many ATS members have seen you call for a first hand report of beating cancer via alternative means?

I would venture to say that it is a subject of interest to those who have been there.

As I recall just the other day, a member mentioned using antioxidants and other alternative means to cure cancer. Would you like me to rummage through all my previous threads visited lately, find this person, and ask him to contact you or reply to this thread?

Sure...as a matter of interest. I'm not throwing out a challenge per se, but it is a good question to throw out to an audience of...shall we say alt-thinking folks. And my point to you was based on your accusations of standard therapies as poisons without the caveat that they are the current best bet in terms of cures. Any drug is a poison with beneficial side effects. And to steer people away from getting treated ought to be criminal.

Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
You must have missed the part in the OP where it says this was a supplemental treatment. These people also had the chemo/ radiation that the control group recieved. And they lived 4 times longer.

You'll notice the part where I stated: "A self edit to say that anything you can do on the side to help is a good thing. I myself complemented my therapy with naturopathic treatments, but only with the approval of my oncologist...he was the guy on point."

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


I think we have the same intention here. We both mean well. Our personal opinion differs in that I view conventional treatment as psuedo-science, and you think it's the best cure we have currently available.

I'd like to point out now to all members, the information and views I provide are not coming from an authorized medical standpoint. They are my personal opinion, besides the article mentioned above.

It's the responsibility of each individual to decide for their selves what they would like to be done to their own body. I do not recommend someone undergoing conventional treatment or not. If I personally were to be informed of having cancer, I would look for alternative means, and conventional therapy as a last resort. It is my right to state my opinion. It is the right of other individuals to take this opinion into consideration or not.

I have taken Vitamin C infusions and will take them again any time I start to feel run down. I also prefer B12 delivered through a syringe rather than taking it orally. Since I have received so many benefits from the high dose Vitamin C infusions, I can imagine it was helpful to those in the midst of conventional cancer treatments.

Cure? Radiation? So then, it is by killing the infection with weapons that a cure is reached? In order for our bodies to be truly strong, shouldn't we be finding ways for our bodies to HEAL? I would be content with a cure, but I would much prefer to be healed.

Healing is true strength.

Ignore fake vitamins. They are a distraction. Get your vitamins from real things. Pine needle tea is a great source of C. Make sure to get them from a source away from roads and clean them well. Get them in their growing prime, not in their old age. It tastes fantastic with some honey as well!!

en.wikipedia.org...


They are also high in beta-carotene which your body synthesizes into however much vitamin a you need. Resveratrol is also something to look into.

Word to the wise about preventing sickness... OTC vitamins are unhealthy, natural sources for the same things, like pine needle tea, will offer you true benefits of said vitamins and no risk of over dosing.

[edit on 11/5/2009 by Dasher]

Fake vitamins? What is that?

Care to give any supporting data that isolate vitamins are unhealthy? I've read several books on orthomolecular therapy, and have scoured through many journal articles saying otherwise.

In 2007, there wasn't one recorded death from vitamins. Thousands die from pharmaceuticals.

Ascorbic acid isn't even a vitamin. That's a misnomer. It would be about as harmful as supplementing glutamine.

Fake vitamins are vitamins made by man-made processes vs natural processes. Not only does this alter the availability of such nutrients, but it is always found in balance with other necessary nutrients to make it a worthwhile endeavor in the first place.

Pissing out what I put in my body is not my idea of a worthwhile endeavor. I eat a whole food and natural diet and feel so much better compared to when I ate poorly and supplemented that I would do anything in my power to continue living my daily cycles this way. I never piss out vitamin-smelling urine.

Overdosing doesn't necessarily mean dying, although it is possible.

Eating poorly (and even more commonly, dehydration) is one of the first signs of poor self-discipline.

[edit on 11/5/2009 by Dasher]

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


He died at over 90...Now let's see how long you live after you have done chronic damage to the body...

Will you go another 40 or fifty years without another episode. The data of cancer coming back after treatment is largely ignored.

It's great that you were cured. But the only reason you were cured was because you had the luxury of health care.

Suppose you did not have that luxury and you had to try something as affordable as vitamin C? Are you going to rain on the parade of those who did not have chemo because they did not have to suffer and were cured?

Sick logic you have.

Originally posted by RightWingAvenger
It's great that you were cured. But the only reason you were cured was because you had the luxury of health care.

Suppose you did not have that luxury and you had to try something as affordable as vitamin C? Are you going to rain on the parade of those who did not have chemo because they did not have to suffer and were cured?
Sick logic you have.

Sorry...up here, and in most of the civilised world health care is a right...not a luxury. But by all means, use the weapons you've got. Just don't die ignoring treatments that work while you're about it.

Sick logic is not taking care of your brethren.