Are There Additional Options with Cancer Treatments?
Have you seen any recent articles about a new cancer treatment? There's generally one that pops-up every few months. I read an article titled "Curing cancer: Nobel laureate Hershko on whether it’s possible." I hope my commentary about the article is helpful for you, who has been searching for natural remedies with cancer treatment and to beat cancer (excerpts from the article are italicized, below).
"There are thousands of different kinds of cancer, and just one kind, breast cancer, can be triggered by 15 different causes," Hershko said.
This excerpted text, above, is essential, but can easily be misunderstood when taken out of context. In such an article about "curing cancer," it is difficult for the reporter to get all the useful details into the article. I'll discuss this below, but first I wanted to discuss a brief meeting I had in 2012.
I Met With A Top Cancer Researcher, Here's What I Learned:
When Professor Yoav Henis was in Los Angeles in 2012, on behalf of the Israel Cancer Research Fund (ICRF), I got a chance to ask him a few questions after his presentation. He is a brilliant man, and it was a very unique opportunity for me to speak directly with a primary cancer researcher. He studies the mechanism of cancer neo-genesis; how cancer develops in the first place.
I told him that when I have discussions with my patients regarding cancer, I often tell them that cancer, like a combination lock, needs more than one thing out-of place before it can be triggered. A combination lock has three numbers. Two are not enough to open it, and the combination has to be in the correct order. His reply was "exactly." And he continued: "but in humans the minimum number would be 4 things. Mice can have 3 [things out of place for cancer to develop], but in humans it must be a minimum of 4."
That's an important, clarifying, and insight-producing statement. So, now, I understand what was missing from the reporter's words, in the Dr. Hershco interview article, I had mentioned, above. My addition follows, after the quote:
"Breast cancer can be triggered by 15 different causes," but there must be at least 4 destructive factors present at one time for any of the triggers to manifest as cancer.
Do you understand this critical point? For a cell to become cancerous, there must be at least 4 destructive factors present. This is HUGE! Those 4 things could be irritation, toxic load, inflammation, and some other factor. In the Dr. Hershko article, he didn't say that breast cancer is caused by any one of 15 causes, he said it can be "triggered." There's a difference. A destructive condition must be there first. There still would have to be at least 3 other factors out of place for any additional trigger to manifest as cancer.
90% of Americans Believe Cancer is Caused by Cancer Genes (1) when, in fact, only 3-5% of Cancers are considered "strongly hereditary" (2)
Taking my conversation with Professor Henis further, I asked him the following: if I were able to therapeutically decrease the toxic load of a patient (called detoxication in scientific journals), through clinical nutrition and natural remedies, and if the toxic load were one of those 4 factors, necessary for cancer to exist, would I be potentially helping the patient with cancer?
His answer: "Absolutely."
I was so inspired to hear this straight from a top cancer researcher. I see this as a true message of hope. Do you get my point? Maybe cancer doesn't necessarily have to be "cured," or killed. I will address this concept, below.
It was an honor to speak with Dr. Henis, and I am thankful for the ICRF to have brought Professor Henis, of Tel-Aviv University, to Los Angeles in 2012.
Back to my commentary on the original article:
Hershko is quite skeptical of claims and expectations of a "cure" for cancer. To achieve that, he says, “We must remove every cancer cell in a patient’s body. If only one remains, it can grow and proliferate again.”
When a reporter quotes a high level researcher, like Dr. Hershko, you may end-up with the reporter's level of understanding instead of the researcher's. One cell does not cause cancer if it alone were present, unless all the destructive factors for cancer were still present. The above statement about one cell producing cancer proliferation is strictly for the theoretical case of a "cancer treatment" doing all the killing of cancer cells, in a body that is already a cancer producing body, where all the necessary destructive factors for cancer (all 4 of them) are still present and have not been changed.
However, in cases of compromise to the bio-transformation systems of the body (your own purification systems), your alternative health doctor would just have to find which of the systems were affected, and then re-establish the optimal functioning (functional medicine) of those systems of bio-transformation: the "detoxication" systems of your body (detoxification). Cancer support requires skilled professional assistance. Alternative cancer treatment options can never be done with do-it-yourself protocols. Never!
Don't you dare think that you could just do this without expert help.
If those compromised systems are at least one in the combination of at least 4 destructive factors that must be present for cancer to exist, then by reestablishing the optimal functioning of these systems, the body would have the potential to be tumor-free, or become tumor-free through its self regulatory systems. It wouldn't matter if there were one cancer cell in the body when the body's next step would be to neutralize that cell, by its own regulatory systems (a drug-free process).
The idea of killing cancer cells is the paradigm that has kept us decades behind in having real progress for cancer treatment. It is a 50 year old paradigm that largely doesn't work, except for a few cancers like childhood leukemia, for which reaching remission is at least a 50/50 chance.
Fifty years of failed cancer research and cancer treatments show how the conventional goal to kill cancer (cancer treatment) has mostly failed us. After all this time, maybe, we can finally see that cancer need only be taken apart; not killed! The functional medicine approach I use for my patients may be considered like a metabolic therapy. It is a supportive addition, or "adjunct" to conventional or alternative cancer treatment.
In 1969, Hershko started his research on how the body cleanses itself of unneeded and malfunctioning proteins, but his work was largely ignored or dismissed for the next 10 years.
This is the key, and it may not be limited to proteins. If not even one of the 4 destructive factors necessary for a body to develop a tumor-producing-ability is never addressed, a "cure" for cancer is a fallacy.
“People just weren’t interested in my research; they didn’t realize how important it was,” he said.
Yes. If a detoxifying system of your body is compromised to some degree, or is "blocked" to some degree, this must be professionally addressed. If only your body were given the right support and the right direction, this could be a huge step forward in deconstructing cancer. We could never call this a "cancer treatment." But without that support and direction it is like running up a never ending hill; trying to artificially do the job the body should be able to do with the proper support and direction we can give.
Healing Happens
This is great news! It is the brightest news you could ever hear about "natural remedies to enhance cancer treatments" because it says the mechanisms that put cancer together in the first place can be taken apart, and your potential for healing can potentially be put back together (reassembled) by using an adjunct cancer program including natural remedies. Did you get that? It is not cancer treatment. A holistic/nutritional adjunct cancer plan has the potential to help you, but without huge expenses and without powerful drugs. This is huge!
Deconstructing Cancer
There are alternative-thinking doctors who can see the bigger picture of your total level of health, and who have an adjunct nutritional system and holistic method that is not a way of killing cancer cells at all; aka "cancer treatment." I happen to be one of them, and I'm bold enough to tell you.
Adjunct care is a type of complementary care, to support better healing and recovery and to potentially help you reach remission.
If this makes sense to you, you should contact my office today (Los Angeles area, in Beverly Hills), but in advance of your call let's make it doubly clear: Adjunct cancer support is not for killing cancer cells. It is not an alternative "cancer treatment," it is also not passive care, and it requires your own effort to follow my directions and be successful.
References:
1. American Institute for Cancer Research 24 Dec 2010
2. American Cancer Society: Global Cancer Facts & Figures 2013