Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site wucs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!wucs!mef
From: mef@wucs.UUCP (Mark Frisse)
Newsgroups: net.med
Subject: Re: Unconventional Cancer Therapy
Message-ID: <690@wucs.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 2-Feb-85 01:14:33 EST
Article-I.D.: wucs.690
Posted: Sat Feb  2 01:14:33 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Feb-85 14:47:57 EST
References: <532@tesla.UUCP>
Organization: Washington U. in St. Louis, CS Dept.
Lines: 62

> 
> Is there anyone out there following the Gerson Cancer Therapy method?
> The Gerson doctors claim a cure rate of over 60% - for people who are
> in advanced stages of cancer, having been through the rounds of conventional
> doctors.  My mother, upon returning from the Gerson hospital, claimed that
> she saw amazing cures in which people's tumor masses shrunk visibly over
> a period of days.  The diet is relatively innocuous (if one doesn't
> consider the work and willpower required to remain on it) and should
> not interfere with other therapy methods.  The basic idea is to restore
> the patient's imuune system to full function by eliminating the bodily
> (metabolic ?) poisons which preoccupy the liver, allowing it to function
> at far above normal levels.
> 
> Most conventional M.D.'s my mother has seen have been violently antagonistic
> towards her and the therapy.  (Apparently they have heard of it.)
> Most of today's M.D.'s, especially oncologists, have not had any in-depth
> training even in standard nutritional principles, so I find it hard to
> understand why they are so against a treatment with such a possibility
> for success.  
>  ....Especially, as in my mother's case, when the doctors
> don't know what to do?
> 
> Eric Novikoff
> (tesla!novikoff@Cornell.ARPA)
I thinkg that "the doctors" DID " know "what to do" when
confronted with a terrible condition like adenocarcinoma
of unknown primary.....That is, they did no harm.
I am a board eligible medical oncologist and, like most of
my peers, have extensive training in biochemistry and
nutritional/metabolic pathways.  I look forward to reading
a report about this new form of cancer treatment in any reputable
medical journal....If this physician has not intentions of
submitting his data to a peer review process, I feel it is
reasonable to speculate that he just is "hacking" at the
public's expense.

The claims for efficacy apparently are based upon the presumption
that the liver is "poisoned" by some product produced by the
tumor, that "vitamins" can eliminate this "poisoning", that
the liver then will be enhaced, and magically, influence the
immune system to kill tumor cells in a selective fashion.
I'm sure the immunologists on the net will have more to
say about this, but this "model" of host-tumor relationships
seems a bit weak.

I imagine the group treating patients with diet and vitamins is
extremely sympathetic, concerned, and compassionate...I applaud
them for that and wish I could say that I and my fellow M.D.s
have a perfect track record in that area.  
But I will not accept claims for therapeutic efficacy without
data....and there are no data that stand up to scrutiny.

Cancer is terrible, and people should have a right to make
informed decisions when faced with therapeutic alternatives.
But we have an obligation to give our patients hard data,
and not  anecdotes.

For the sake of those chosing alternative cancer treatments,
I hope they work.

Mark Frisse M.D.
(Not part of any conspiracy)