It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
...
However, if you live in California or some other "progressive" state which prefers their citizens not to think too much for themselves, you must ignore this entire last paragraph, despite my constitutional rights of free expression.
Under California law (AB 1707.1) "The sale, offering for sale, holding for sale, delivering, giving away, prescribing or administering of any drug, medicine, compound or device to be used in the diagnosis, treatment, alleviation or cure of cancer is unlawful unless (1) an application with respect thereto has been approved under Section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act or..." .
In California, you are only allowed to treat cancer with 1) whole body poisoning chemotherapy which heavily damages the immune system and is sometimes carcinogenic in nature, 2) X-Ray radiation which is massively carcinogenic in nature, and 3) disfiguring and disabling surgery.
Your health and well being in California are, for all practical purposes, of very low priority to law makers. In my opinion, the law makers are a combination of dupes and PAC whores of the vested pharmaceutical / AMA interests of the main stream allopathic establishment. Under the guises of public health and safety, the allopathic medical establishment have (under the law) effectively taken away much of your control over your own body and the right to choose your own health / illness care treatment. The average chemo and radiation "doctor" makes well over two hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year for what in my opinion is essentially quackery. The cancer industry in the U. S. is a two hundred billion dollar a year business. It is time to take back what is rightfully ours by changing the laws. Our state and ferderal legislative bodies need to do what the Legislative Assembly of Alberta, Canada did in May 1996 when they got fed up with their allopathic medical establishment. Here is the paragraph they added to their law books.
" A registered practitioner shall not be found guilty of unbecoming conduct or be found to be incapable or unfit to practice medicine or osteopathy soley on the basis that the registered practitioner employs a therapy that is non-traditional or departs from the prevailing medical practices, unless it can be demonstrated that the therapy has a safety risk for that patient unreasonably greater than the prevailing treatment."
..
..
The bonds between adjacent protein molecules in the virus capsid coat are generally hydrogen bonds and these are relatively weak chemical bonds. To a first approximation, we can treat each protein clump (molecule) in the capsid coat as a simple harmonic oscillator as illustrated in Figure 4C. Imagine in Figure 4C that the center of mass is a steel ball. Imagine that that steel ball has two elastic cords attached to it and that the cords are attached to the ceiling and floor respectfully. And furthermore, the elastic cords are under some tension. Now imagine that the ball is pulled back and then released. The ball will oscillate back and forth at some constant frequency. If the tension is now increased in the cords and the ball is again pulled back and let go, the ball will again oscillate back and forth at a constant frequency, but now at a higher frequency.
..
If the cords are not well secured to the ceiling or floor, the cords may decouple before the system goes into equilibrium with the rhythmic driving force. In the case of the periodically spaced, elastically coupled, and closed-on-themselves virus capsid sub-structures seen in Figure 4A, the "floor " and "ceiling" connections are weak hydrogen bonds between adjacent protein clumps of the virus capsid. Figure 4E illustrates the most stressful standing wave oscillation mode on a ten member protein clump ring. In this oscillation mode, adjacent protein clumps are oscillating 180 degrees out of phase, that is, as one protein clump is moving upward from its equilibrium position, the adjacent clumps are moving downward and visa versa. This type of oscillation mode puts maximum tension / stress on the weak hydrogen bonds holding the protein clumps to each other. At some relatively small displacement amplitude, the hydrogen bonds will fail and the ring /capsid coat will disintegrate. Rife observed viruses exploding like little hand grenades when they were exposed to their mortal oscillation rate (MOR).
Focused pulses of ultrasound can eradicate prostate cancer as effectively as cutting the tumour out with surgery, but with far fewer side effects.
This conclusion comes from the most comprehensive study of the technique to date, carried out by Jean-Yves Chapelon, of the French Institute of Health and Medical Research in Paris, and colleagues. Prostate cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death among men.
"The results are very exciting," said Gail ter Harr, who is studying ultrasound as a means of treating liver cancer at the Royal Marsden Hospital in London, UK. "It is by far the most advanced area of clinical trials."
The researchers conducted a trial involving 243 prostate cancer patients at a hospital in Lyon. They found that a few seconds of concentrated ultrasound could obliterate a tumour, but without having to cut into the body. In contrast, surgery caused much more collateral damage.
www.newscientist.com...
...
But many cancer treatments have shown promise in animals only to fail in humans. Reinforcing the need for scepticism at this very early stage, a spokesman for Cancer-Research UK says Gendel's work should be treated with "absolute caution" until more information is available
Originally posted by Long Lance
Some of you will ask why this is in the 'Medical Issues and Conspiracies section, well, i'll give you a reason - some states such as Kalifornia obviously feel the obligation to outlaw any unorthodox cancer treatment...[/qupte]
May I point out that your source is extremely biased and does NOT quote the whole law?
Under California law (AB 1707.1) "The sale, offering for sale, holding for sale, delivering, giving away, prescribing or administering of any drug, medicine, compound or device to be used in the diagnosis, treatment, alleviation or cure of cancer is unlawful unless (1) an application with respect thereto has been approved under Section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act or..." .
So you think that cancer treatments should be offered to the public, without any proof they work? In the past, such treatments have included making you drink a mix of tar and turpentine, plastering cow excrement on the cancer to "draw it out", etc, etc, etc.
I can understand that you might not want those options withdrawn from the public. Myself, I have a real problem with them being offered as treatments.
In California, you are only allowed to treat cancer with 1) whole body poisoning chemotherapy which heavily damages the immune system and is sometimes carcinogenic in nature, 2) X-Ray radiation which is massively carcinogenic in nature, and 3) disfiguring and disabling surgery.
Again, your sources are biased.
No one runs to The Department Of Medical Enforcement the second you have a diagnosis of cancer and hauls you off in chains for one of the three treatments. Doctors will suggest a number of conditions but they don't call the enforcers to make you take those treatments. You can walk off, ignore the suggested followup calls, and take whatever advice you find on Internet instead.
" A registered practitioner shall not be found guilty of unbecoming conduct or be found to be incapable or unfit to practice medicine or osteopathy soley on the basis that the registered practitioner employs a therapy that is non-traditional or departs from the prevailing medical practices, unless it can be demonstrated that the therapy has a safety risk for that patient unreasonably greater than the prevailing treatment."
Translation: A homeopath or osteopath can offer alternative treatments ONLY if it can be proved (by case studies and double-blind tests) that the treatment itself is not harmful.
In other words, if the homeopath/osteopath wants to treat your cancer by vitamin megadoses, that's okay. Vitamins aren't harmful. If that same person wants to treat you by making you swallow 1/4 ounce of mercury per day, then the state government will close them down and haul them to court.
By the way, that "swallowing mercury" was indeed a cancer treatment offered by a well-known quack in America in the late 1800s. Mercury is a deadly poison and will turn your insides to goo in a matter of days and you will die a painful death from hemorrhage and the poisoning -- but, of course, by that time the quack had the money and was gone with his "medicine."
Now for the "Stupid Science" part:
The bonds between adjacent protein molecules in the virus capsid coat are generally hydrogen bonds and these are relatively weak chemical bonds.
...just like other parts of your body.
To a first approximation, we can treat each protein clump (molecule) in the capsid coat as a simple harmonic oscillator as illustrated in Figure 4C.
In other words, they're going to microwave you.
Exploding poodles, anyone?
(some Really Stupid Science clipped)
In the case of the periodically spaced, elastically coupled, and closed-on-themselves virus capsid sub-structures seen in Figure 4A, the "floor " and "ceiling" connections are weak hydrogen bonds between adjacent protein clumps of the virus capsid.
This is just plain lame. The writer of that web page has no clue about viruses or virus coats. They apparently saw a Discovery Channel program on viruses and now "know all there is to know about viruses and know more than doctors." Uhm... right.
Meanwhile, we know that the coat has differnt structures and different types of bonds and that the capsid substructures are not clumps but more often folded molecules However, the writer of that web page is not about to let electron microscopy and other modern technologies and the things that they reveal distract them from their mission -- selling YOU on the Evyl Medical Establishment with a subtopic of Buy All Our Stuff. :
www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov...
pubs.acs.org...
The advantages are obvious, cancer is targetted at a cellular level, basically reducing 'collateral damage' to zero.
see f.ex. www.newscientist.com...
You need to read that article better. Collateral damage is NOT zero. It's less than surgery. It is appropriate for SOME cancers of some sizes... but not all of them.
That said, it's an interesting new treatment and one that is waiting further tests.
Most certainly, this method, like any other, is not omnipotent, it's merely another tool in the arsenal. Unfortunately, legislation such as cited above will not help its development
Again, no. What that law says is that before it gets approved to be used, they have to show that this one study was NOT a fluke. Followup studies are being done, as well as longitudinal studies. They need to know if the cancer comes back more often in these same patients and they need to study other kinds of patients with this same kind of tumor.
Unlike the Quack Industry, they don't take a few successes and run out shouting "HALLELEUJAH! I FOUND IT! I HAVE THE CURE!!! IGNORE ALL THOSE OTHER BUFFOONS!!"
It may take another 5-10 years of tests (AND long-term followup) before this technique is approved for use.
In fact, studies will be funded by these same governments.
Originally posted by Byrd
...
Now for the "Stupid Science" part:
The bonds between adjacent protein molecules in the virus capsid coat are generally hydrogen bonds and these are relatively weak chemical bonds.
..
...just like other parts of your body.
...Cancer cells differ from normal cells in that they are softer and more elastic....
In other words, they're going to microwave you.
Exploding poodles, anyone?
You need to read that article better. Collateral damage is NOT zero. It's less than surgery. It is appropriate for SOME cancers of some sizes... but not all of them.
..
That said, it's an interesting new treatment and one that is waiting further tests.
..
It may take another 5-10 years of tests (AND long-term followup) before this technique is approved for use.
..
Originally posted by Long Lance
Sure the explanation doesn't get to the root of the issue, the target entity needs to have a specific, harmless (to healthy tissue), natural oscillation frequency , otherwise, you couldn't target it without destroying everything..
fortunately, cancer cells usually exhibt different elastic properties, which is even used to diagnose cancer
from: www.cnn.com...
Sound isn't radiation, while i can't deny that it may be harmful if done incorrectly, it's a completely different ballpark.
You need to read that article better. Collateral damage is NOT zero. It's less than surgery. It is appropriate for SOME cancers of some sizes... but not all of them.
..
That said, it's an interesting new treatment and one that is waiting further tests.
I understand your objections wrt the first source, his explanations leave a lot to be desired, especially concerning the actual mechanism, and usability - treating a viral infection would require exposing the entire body to ultrasound, which really isn't feasible...
But, why would the author single out California for no reason?
My guess is because they live in California or they know someone who tried the business in California and got shut down because they were advertising something as a "medical treatment." The author may have someone they know who died ... someone they felt (after being convinced by a website or a book) could have been saved if they'd only been allowed to take, for example Laetrille (ignoring the fact that Laetrille was once considered as a treatment for cancer and like many of these so-called treatments that the "alternative medicine" crew promotes it WAS seriously tested and it was found that the procedure/substance did a lot more harm to the body than if the person had simply done nothing.
Which leads us to the million dollar question, do you think non-orthodox treatment should be available (as in not prohibited by law) as long as the patient intentionally opts for it or not. i mean if you admit that it may become standard procedure in a decade or so, why would you keep it from people who want to use it in its prototypical stage? it's not like they have an awful lot of time to decide, mind you.
The law doesn't prohibit it, and I have no problem with it.
Fatal diseases very occasionally go into remission for reasons we don't understand. I have a friend who was diagnosed with the almost-always-fatal pancreatic cancer some 30 years ago, and he's still very much alive. I think that if someone wants to try a vinegar diet or whatever, that is their business... but I am against a "clinic" advertising that they can cure the things that doctors can't... particularly when there's no evidence for it.
I think that if I was diagnosed with a fatal disease, I would follow the doctors' recommendations, but that I would also hie myself to a good nutritionist and work with them and exercise and massage therapists -- in part to ensure a better quality of life. I might also try accupuncture for chronic pain or other such treatments... treatments that ARE appoved under the law and for which there are some studies indicating that it seems to work for some people.
As for new treatments, I think that these "stupid science" sites tend to make people less aware that there are clinical trials that they can participate in and try out new treatments. One that I'm aware of is a clinical trial being run in several cities to see if yoga does have an impact on depression and the quality of life for depressives. Patients who participate in clinical trials are heavily monitored and compensated for their time (the treatments are free) and issues that they may have get prompt response.
Well.. I kinda got long winded, there. But if someone's going to hold out hope to people with severe illnesses, there really needs to be some good research behind it (checked by other independant researchers) and not just a handfull of "mah momma done told me" anecdotes.
Originally posted by davenman
I've read up on some of the clinical trials that have been done with cancer treatments. Some of the treatments were only tested with a test group of 20 people. More common is a test group of 100 people. The subjects are selected at random to receive either the test drug or a placebo. The subject is not to know which they are receiving. Often with a group of 100 people, they break the group into 3 sets...those that get the test drug, those that get the test drug accompanied by a another drug that has had success, and then the group that get the placebo. Test groups are monitored usually for 6, 12 or 18 months. After that, it is common to lose contact with the test subjects.
A common belief about drugs on the market is that they have been tested on thousands of people. Although it may be the case once in a while, this is simply NOT SO in many cases.
Once a drug is approved for the general population, the pharmaceutical companies pretty much cross their fingers and hope that there are no serious side effects or deaths from the use of their drugs. If there are, they quickly pull the drugs, hire lawyers to engage the victims in negotiations, and lay low for a while until the news is forgotten.
When it comes to alternative treatments, it is usually the patient that researches and works these alternative treatments. There are no groups that I know of out there performing clinical trials on vitamin use over placebos, herbal use over placebos, carrot juice over....etc. Patients that are open to alternative treatments are usually not willing to take the chance of receiving the placebo, therefore finding people willing to enter such a program is difficult in itself. Another factor to that is: those who know that certain things aid recovery from cancer would find it difficult to give test people placebos allowing them to get sicker just to prove a point.
So, until someone performs clinical trials on willing subjects for vitamins, herbals, fruits, nuts, vegatables, sound waves, classical music, rock music, prayer, meditation or whatever else to prove that they don't help, we could do just as well to assume that they do.
There is, yet, another possibility that most in the medical community seem to avoid, the possiblity that cancer is more of a symptom than a disease. It is possible that the real cause of cancer comes from a difficiency in the body and thus a weakened system that supports the cancered organ. Much of the foods we eat today have been processed so much, stored for so long or microwaved so much that the life giving elements within them have depleted.
As we examine disease, we must realize that it is a part of the circle of life (think of the tune from Lion King here). Everything in this world lives off of something else. Everything we consume must be living or at least recently living with the exception of vitamins and minerals. It has been said that man has no predators. This is not true. Viruses, parasites and bacteria are our predators. Some of these are symbiotic in nature, but most are detrimental to our health.
It should be considered that bacteria, parasites, viruses, or just deficiencies MAY be the underlying cause of cancer. Cancer MAY just be a symptom of another problem.