General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Cancer quotes

Started by Anth · · Last activity · 4 posts · 355 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
20 May 2004
Last activity
22 May 2004
Original author
Anth
Posts
4
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
355
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–4 of 4
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. http://www.nutritionandcancer.org/view/nutritionandcancer/s99p1074.htm

    Nutrition and Cancer

    The overall result of these experiments (described in the research paper
    from the journal Mechanisms of Ageing and Development reproduced in pdf
    format below) on squamous cell carcinoma in mice is that healthful diets
    increase the growth rate of cancer. Poor diets decrease its growth rate.
    This is probably a general effect that applies equally well to humans. ...if
    diet restriction were practiced by all cancer patients in the United States,
    the resulting life-extension might equal or surpass that resulting from the
    combined efforts of the entire current medical oncology effort.

    While it is likely (although not proved) that excellent nutrition
    strengthens the immune system and other defense mechanisms in such a way as
    to lower the probability of contracting cancer, it is clear that, once
    cancer has established itself, excellent nutrition leads to its accelerated
    growth. This may not be true of all cancers, but it is likely to be true of
    a large fraction of them.
    The attempts to develop drugs that decrease the vascularization of hard
    tumors have been well publicized. These are essentially efforts to reduce
    the nutrients supplied to the cancer tissue itself, while not affecting the
    rest of the body. While a promising area of research, these drugs are not
    now available.
    We discovered, however, that starving the whole organism is very effective
    in mice. (There are many anecdotal accounts of this in humans, also, but no
    controlled trials.)
    The growth rate of cancer in these mice was varied over a 20-fold range by
    diet alone. Super nutrition (lots of vitamins, etc.) increased the growth
    rate two-fold, while diet restriction reduced the growth rate ten-fold.
    Although this was done with one organism (mice) and with one cancer
    (squamous cell carcinoma), the effect is so large that it is very likely
    that it will be seen in humans and with other types of cancer. Also, the
    rationale for its effect is simple and sensible, and many individual humans
    have experienced this effect.
    There are numerous ways to reduce one's nutritional intake. Perhaps the
    safest and most enjoyable (and highest quality for the nutrients that are
    ingested) is the raw fruits and vegetable diet originally developed by Ann
    Wigmore (now deceased) and her co-workers. This was popularized by Arn and
    Edie Mae Hunsberger in their book, "How I Conquered Cancer Naturally." (The
    book is still available by contacting Arn Hunsberger at telephone (619)
    468-3561. These developers and writers did not understand why their diet
    helped cancer victims and tended to give explanations based on improved
    nutrition.
    It is a fact, however, that one cannot obtain sufficient nutrients (over a
    prolonged period) from raw fruits and vegetables alone because the bulk
    fiber and water in these diets prevents eating enough. The proponents
    advocated juicing (to get more) and supplements of staples after a month or
    two. They also, in later years, added staples to the diets initially.
    Note that, in the mouse experiments on raw fruits and vegetables, the cancer
    slowing effect was completely lost when soy protein or other dietary
    improvements were added.
    Cancer is a scourge that afflicts hundreds of millions of people. Hopefully,
    someday there will be a completely effective ordinary therapy. In the
    meantime, however, if I or some other member of my family contracted cancer,
    we would make the best guess possible as to the proper response. In that
    case, we would definitely choose diet restriction by raw fruits and
    vegetables in accordance with the research shown here.
    One final note, describing one of many human stories that I have heard over
    the years:
    A surgeon telephoned me to ask some questions about this diet. During the
    conversation, he told me why he had become interested in it (to the great
    displeasure of his colleagues).
    A patient had come to him in whose throat was growing a completely
    inoperable and soon-to-be-fatal cancer. He told the patient that there was
    nothing he could do for him and that he would soon die.
    The patient, however, went to Ann Wigmore's establishment and started eating
    their initial diet of strictly raw fruits and vegetables. He pursued this
    fanatically, however, and never switched to Wigmore and Hunsberger's
    phase-two diet including additional staples.
    Many months later, the patient returned to the surgeon. The surgeon told me
    that there were three things that were unusual about this patient.
    1. He was back. He should already have been long dead.
    2. There was not a trace of cancer in his throat.
    3. He looked like he had just stepped out of a Nazi or Communist
    concentration camp. The patient was almost dead of malnutrition. He was a
    walking skeleton.
    The surgeon nursed him back to good nutritional health - but the cancer
    never returned.
    All of our experiments on diet restriction involved slowing the growth rate
    of cancer (although slowing by 20-fold is equivalent to a cure in people of
    advanced age). We did not observe cures or remissions of the cancer. It is
    possible that this occurred with some mice, but we were not specifically
    studying it.
    Therefore, I am not willing to say that diet restriction will cause the
    remission of tumors. I know, however, that diet restriction can slow the
    growth of cancer markedly. This effect is so large that, in my opinion, if
    diet restriction were practiced by all cancer patients in the United States,
    the resulting life-extension might equal or surpass that resulting from the
    combined efforts of the entire current medical oncology effort.
    The research paper reproduced in pdf format below summarizes work carried
    out by my coworkers and me when I was President and Research Director of the
    Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine. The results of these
    experiments caused an argument between Linus and me, which ended our 16-year
    period of work together. He was not willing to accept the experimentally
    proved fact that vitamin C in ordinary doses accelerated the growth rate of
    squamous cell carcinoma in these mice.
    At the time, Linus was promoting his claim that "75% of all cancer can be
    prevented and cured by vitamin C alone." This claim proved to be without
    experimental foundation and not true, although the possibility that modest
    doses of vitamin C somewhat improve resistance to cancer has never been
    adequately tested. The dose response curve of vitamin C vs. mouse squamous
    cell carcinoma is shown in the paper below. Vitamin C increased the rate of
    growth of cancer at human equivalents of 1 to 5 grams per day, but
    suppressed the cancer growth rate at doses on the order of 100 grams per day
    (near the lethal dose), as do other measures of malnutrition.

    Arthur B. Robinson
    Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine
    December 1999

  2. "Anth" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    http://www.nutritionandcancer.org/view/nutritionandcancer/s99p1074.htm

    Nutrition and Cancer

    The overall result of these experiments (described in the research paper
    from the journal Mechanisms of Ageing and Development reproduced in pdf
    format below) on squamous cell carcinoma in mice is that healthful diets
    increase the growth rate of cancer. Poor diets decrease its growth rate.
    This is probably a general effect that applies equally well to humans.


    ....if

    Quoted message said:

    diet restriction were practiced by all cancer patients in the United


    States,

    Quoted message said:

    the resulting life-extension might equal or surpass that resulting from


    the

    Quoted message said:

    combined efforts of the entire current medical oncology effort.

    While it is likely (although not proved) that excellent nutrition
    strengthens the immune system and other defense mechanisms in such a way


    as

    Quoted message said:

    to lower the probability of contracting cancer, it is clear that, once
    cancer has established itself, excellent nutrition leads to its


    accelerated

    Quoted message said:

    growth. This may not be true of all cancers, but it is likely to be true


    of

    Quoted message said:

    a large fraction of them.
    The attempts to develop drugs that decrease the vascularization of hard
    tumors have been well publicized. These are essentially efforts to reduce
    the nutrients supplied to the cancer tissue itself, while not affecting


    the

    Quoted message said:

    rest of the body. While a promising area of research, these drugs are not
    now available.
    We discovered, however, that starving the whole organism is very effective
    in mice. (There are many anecdotal accounts of this in humans, also, but


    no

    Quoted message said:

    controlled trials.)
    The growth rate of cancer in these mice was varied over a 20-fold range by
    diet alone. Super nutrition (lots of vitamins, etc.) increased the growth
    rate two-fold, while diet restriction reduced the growth rate ten-fold.
    Although this was done with one organism (mice) and with one cancer
    (squamous cell carcinoma), the effect is so large that it is very likely
    that it will be seen in humans and with other types of cancer. Also, the
    rationale for its effect is simple and sensible, and many individual


    humans

    Quoted message said:

    have experienced this effect.
    There are numerous ways to reduce one's nutritional intake. Perhaps the
    safest and most enjoyable (and highest quality for the nutrients that are
    ingested) is the raw fruits and vegetable diet originally developed by Ann
    Wigmore (now deceased) and her co-workers. This was popularized by Arn and
    Edie Mae Hunsberger in their book, "How I Conquered Cancer Naturally."


    (The

    Quoted message said:

    book is still available by contacting Arn Hunsberger at telephone (619)
    468-3561. These developers and writers did not understand why their diet
    helped cancer victims and tended to give explanations based on improved
    nutrition.
    It is a fact, however, that one cannot obtain sufficient nutrients (over a
    prolonged period) from raw fruits and vegetables alone because the bulk
    fiber and water in these diets prevents eating enough. The proponents
    advocated juicing (to get more) and supplements of staples after a month


    or

    Quoted message said:

    two. They also, in later years, added staples to the diets initially.
    Note that, in the mouse experiments on raw fruits and vegetables, the


    cancer

    Quoted message said:

    slowing effect was completely lost when soy protein or other dietary
    improvements were added.
    Cancer is a scourge that afflicts hundreds of millions of people.


    Hopefully,

    Quoted message said:

    someday there will be a completely effective ordinary therapy. In the
    meantime, however, if I or some other member of my family contracted


    cancer,

    Quoted message said:

    we would make the best guess possible as to the proper response. In that
    case, we would definitely choose diet restriction by raw fruits and
    vegetables in accordance with the research shown here.
    One final note, describing one of many human stories that I have heard


    over

    Quoted message said:

    the years:
    A surgeon telephoned me to ask some questions about this diet. During the
    conversation, he told me why he had become interested in it (to the great
    displeasure of his colleagues).
    A patient had come to him in whose throat was growing a completely
    inoperable and soon-to-be-fatal cancer. He told the patient that there was
    nothing he could do for him and that he would soon die.
    The patient, however, went to Ann Wigmore's establishment and started


    eating

    Quoted message said:

    their initial diet of strictly raw fruits and vegetables. He pursued this
    fanatically, however, and never switched to Wigmore and Hunsberger's
    phase-two diet including additional staples.
    Many months later, the patient returned to the surgeon. The surgeon told


    me

    Quoted message said:

    that there were three things that were unusual about this patient.
    1. He was back. He should already have been long dead.
    2. There was not a trace of cancer in his throat.
    3. He looked like he had just stepped out of a Nazi or Communist
    concentration camp. The patient was almost dead of malnutrition. He was a
    walking skeleton.
    The surgeon nursed him back to good nutritional health - but the cancer
    never returned.
    All of our experiments on diet restriction involved slowing the growth


    rate

    Quoted message said:

    of cancer (although slowing by 20-fold is equivalent to a cure in people


    of

    Quoted message said:

    advanced age). We did not observe cures or remissions of the cancer. It is
    possible that this occurred with some mice, but we were not specifically
    studying it.
    Therefore, I am not willing to say that diet restriction will cause the
    remission of tumors. I know, however, that diet restriction can slow the
    growth of cancer markedly. This effect is so large that, in my opinion, if
    diet restriction were practiced by all cancer patients in the United


    States,

    Quoted message said:

    the resulting life-extension might equal or surpass that resulting from


    the

    Quoted message said:

    combined efforts of the entire current medical oncology effort.

    Dearie me! I fear Robinsin has become as much a crusader for dubious
    causes as Pauling was. I disagree strongly with the extrapolation from
    animal experiements to humans. That is constantly proved to be unwise, most
    recently with the effects of angiogenesis inhibitors.

    Dietary restriction and indeed outright starvation are common enough
    consequence of some human cancers without having any evident effect on the
    growth rate of cancer.

    It is certainly likely that eating less in general and more fruit and
    vegetables would help prevent cancer.

    Peter Moran

    Quoted message said:

    The research paper reproduced in pdf format below summarizes work carried
    out by my coworkers and me when I was President and Research Director of


    the

    Quoted message said:

    Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine. The results of these
    experiments caused an argument between Linus and me, which ended our


    16-year

    Quoted message said:

    period of work together. He was not willing to accept the experimentally
    proved fact that vitamin C in ordinary doses accelerated the growth rate


    of

    Quoted message said:

    squamous cell carcinoma in these mice.
    At the time, Linus was promoting his claim that "75% of all cancer can be
    prevented and cured by vitamin C alone." This claim proved to be without
    experimental foundation and not true, although the possibility that modest
    doses of vitamin C somewhat improve resistance to cancer has never been
    adequately tested. The dose response curve of vitamin C vs. mouse squamous
    cell carcinoma is shown in the paper below. Vitamin C increased the rate


    of

    Quoted message said:

    growth of cancer at human equivalents of 1 to 5 grams per day, but
    suppressed the cancer growth rate at doses on the order of 100 grams per


    day

    Quoted message said:

    (near the lethal dose), as do other measures of malnutrition.

    Arthur B. Robinson
    Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine
    December 1999

  3. Truth be told, their (Robinson/Pauling) 17-year relationship ended in
    more than an "argument" with Robinson suing Pauling & his Institute for
    libel/slander in a California Superior Court, & it was settled out of
    court with the Pauling Institute paying Dr. Robinson approximately half
    a million dollars (about $2 million in today's money) approximately 20
    years ago.

  4. <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Truth be told, their (Robinson/Pauling) 17-year relationship ended in
    more than an "argument" with Robinson suing Pauling & his Institute for
    libel/slander in a California Superior Court, & it was settled out of
    court with the Pauling Institute paying Dr. Robinson approximately half
    a million dollars (about $2 million in today's money) approximately 20
    years ago.

    Interesting.

    Peter Moran

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.