Acclaimed Journalist & Author, Bob Whitaker's Brilliant Book:

ANATOMY OF AN EPIDEMIC:

Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America

“I suppose, if your only tool is a hammer, it's tempting to treat everything as if it were a nail.” – Abraham Maslow

  

Whitaker introduces the book, explains how he ended up in this complicated position (13 minute mark to the 23:25 mark**) and rushes to scratch the surface of the science before running out of time. (WGBH Boston, 2010.)

[ Note: The book's a thorough, nuanced, big picture and in-depth examination of the long-term biology, bio-chemistry, epidemiology and politics at play... and it's a million miles from the straw-man its critics have tried to make of it.

In fact, Whitaker actually does a significantly better job of explaining (and thereby, inadvertently supporting) the precise effects, biochemistry and utility of psych-drugs than anyone I've seen, heard or read in 18+ years of interest. [ *-* See the note(s) at the bottom of the page.]

Here's how he sums up the driving question of the book: “We know that many people are helped by psychiatric medications. We know that many people stabilize well on them and will personally attest to how the drugs have helped them lead normal lives. Yet, during the past 20 years, a period during which our society has embraced the use of psychiatric medications, the number of people on [US] government disability due to mental illness has tripled, from 1.25 million to 4 million. And so I ask this question, specifically noting that it is heretical in kind: Could our drug-based paradigm of care, in some unforeseen way, be fueling this modern-day plague?”   

[ emphasis added ]

Ultimately he makes one hell of a compelling case for more comprehensive approaches to treatment, diagnosis and healing --- without throwing effective drug use under the bus. ]

-  -  -


“This is the most alarming book I’ve read in years. The approach is neither polemical nor ideologically slanted. Relying on medical evidence and historical documentation, Whitaker builds his case like a prosecuting attorney.” — Carl Elliott, M.D., Ph.D., Professor, Center for Bioethics, University of Minnesota

“There is nothing unorthodox here—this case is solid and evidence-backed. If psychiatry wants to retain its credibility with the public, it will now have to engage with the scientific argument at the core of this cogently and elegantly written book.” — David Healy, M.D., Professor of Psychiatry, Cardiff University

“A devastating critique. . . . One day, we will look back at the way we think about and treat mental illness and wonder if we were all mad. Anatomy of an Epidemic should be required reading for both patients and physicians.” — Shannon Brownlee, Senior Research Fellow, New America Foundation; Author of Overtreated

**If you're interested in the material the first 24 minutes (of the above video) are a good place to start, but much of the rest of the science discussed (i.e. antipsychotics as a case study for the larger problem***) is improved in the Vermont video, posted a little ways down.

(In Vermont he's less rushed, and more practiced and up to date.)

{ Links: A.B.E. (hardcover/1st edition),  Chapters (softcover), Amazon ...

Btw: "Brilliance Audiobooks" did a less-than brilliant job of selecting the right reader for the material... Wouldn't recommend it.}

***re. withdrawal–relapse; using anti-psychotics, and dopamine, for example:

It's now fairly widely known that antipsychotic (neuroleptic) withdrawal can and does trigger psychotic behaviour in and of itself — even in people with absolutely no previous history of mental illness.

This happens because (1st) the drugs put the emergency brake on dopamine neurotransmitter biochemistry; (2nd) the brain responds by hitting the gas, through gene regulation and neuroplasticity — to try to maintain as much normal function as possible; then, upon withdrawal, the drugs are metabolized away much faster than the brain's (slow) neuroplastic responce — so the dopamine systems are left in an unnerving, peddle-to-the-metal twilight-zone.*^✝*

And because it usually takes weeks and weeks (or months) for even the healthiest and nimblest of brains to BEGIN to re-calibrate, both withdrawal and abrupt change regularly produce TERRIBLE results — in almost all classes and brands of psych-drugs. (E.g. SSRI's, stimulants, etc*^✝* )

[Scroll down, see the Vermont talk and / or *^✝*the footnote 3/4ths down.]

[ Answering the Critics   |  Behavioural Therapy for Depression, Stephen Ilardi   |   15 minute shotgun profile of the science, and paradigm shift, re depression and anti-depressants (Whitaker in Maryland, 2011)   |   Bird's eye-view of a complex book, Sunday Edition w. M. Enright   |   John Oliver: 'Marketing to Doctors' ]

Psychotropic drugs and kids, on WGBH Boston (2010)



Note: The 2013 ADHD talk (down the page) covers a lot of the same material but focuses on just ADHD, is slightly more up-to-date and, (as with the Vermont talk, below) Whitaker's slightly more practised, relaxed and careful presenting.

Incidentally — because he touches on the subject of SSRIs here — the story of how Eli-Lilly brought Prozac to market (the first "second generation" SSRI "wonder drug") and how shoddy some of its original scientific underpinnings were is — if you're interested in the story — must read material.** (Anatomy of an Epidemic, Chapter 14, pgs 284-295.)

**Ps: Here's the guy who first broke the story, Dr Peter Breggin, testifying to the US House Committee on Veterans' Affairs on SSRI induced** suicide, mania, violence and bi-polar (26 minutes).  

Breggin's one of the most high-profile, unorthodox academic Psychiatrists around; part counter-cultural idealist, part behavioural psychotherapist.

He's been at odds with a lot of contemporary — drugs, drugs and more drugs — psychiatry for most of his career...

(And his critics — Eli Lilly et al. — tried hard to systematically paint him as a scientologist quack.)

**See Breggin's collection of articles, D. Healy, J. Moncrieff, (said brilliant book) etc., to see how — and why — this increased suicide, violence, mania and bi-polar risk story is, tragically, anything but scientology.

[** Unfortunately it's not just correlation that violence, mania and suicide risks peak during withdrawal, and when starting a drug or changing a prescription. Rather, in a significant percentage of cases it's a direct consequence of drug-induced abnormalities — which peak at these exact times. (Immediately AFTER a med increase, change and or withdrawal.)^{[ 1, 2, 3...]} ]

Antipsychotics, bi-polar, Hippocrates, and an informative discussion with the audience; Brattleboro, Vermont. (March, 2014.)


(Fyi: The first 10 minutes is just the usual boiler-plate intro to the big picture disability epidemic... And again, 75% of the antipsychotic science is a repeat of the 2010 talk (but here he brings the story up to date, discusses iatrogenic cognitive decline, and has more time, and practice, presenting the material.)

[update: Here's a recent (2016) student Q & A on the same material (right up to date).]

ADHD and long-term outcomes in children; on WGBH, Boston (2013.)


[Again, this talk covers a lot of the same material as the 2010 children's discussion (up the page), but focuses mostly on ADHD, is more polished, and slightly more up to date.)

Footnote(s)

*^✝* re. Withdrawal (aka "discontinuation syndrome"), with respect to most psychiatric drugs: Again, because the brain's re-calibration process is so painstakingly slow (dependent on gene regulation and neuroplasticity), most of us have been bamboozled into thinking many disturbing and longer-term withdrawal effects are entirely “underlying illness”, rather than pernicious biological dependence — that's often the case. (i.e. Drug-altered receptor density, size and/or super-sensitivity.)

Accordingly, way too many otherwise healthy people are withdrawn from their medication way too abruptly; Which leaves the drug-conditioned neurotransmitter systems grasping at straws for some semblance of normal function; Which, in turn, regularly sends recovered, balanced and optimistic patients into one brand or another of prolonged, iatrogenic regression.

Which, again — and not surprisingly — too often triggers a downward spiral, a severe relapse, and/or a new extreme in mania, depression, psychosis and or anxiety.*^✝* 

(And again [contrary to popular belief], often this has little or nothing to do with underlying illness, and everything to do with how the drugs — and our brains — actually work.)

[ *^✝*btw: most well informed withdrawal prescriptions now follow very slow, calculated and cautious protocols for tapering-off much more gradually than was traditionally the case. (E.g. As many as a dozen incremental dose reductions*, and as long as a month of clear stability, each reduction; in accordance with the limitations of the brain's neuroplastic, gene-regulated, re-calibration response.)

(And fyi: Optimum recovery, post withdrawal, is often a multi-year process.)

Addendums

[ Again: Answering the critics (4 links)]

Irving Kirsch on Antidepressants vs Placebos for the treatment of depression and anxiety, at U of Missouri. (March, 2014.)

The lengthy Q & A afterwards is excellent, btw.

"Depression is a disease of modern civilization." 

Depression researcher Stephen Ilardi begins to explain some behavioural therapy interventions for combating depression and anxiety*. (At TEDxEmoryUniversity, Kansas City.)

[*And here's a more complete, 1 hr and 46 minute discussion of his material.]

*note: thankfully Ilardi's not depressing or stigmatizing.  

• 15 minute shotgun profile of the science –- and paradigm shift -– re depression and anti-depressants. (Whitaker in Gaithersburg Maryland, 2011.)

•  Brief bird's eye-view of a complex book on The Sunday Edition w. Michael Enright

---

Much Lighter, Also Brilliant:




Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Marketing to Doctors (HBO)

*-*(ps) My mom worked as a psychiatric nurse for more than 25 years,

And it was her prescient, professional misgivings — about over-medicating the vulnerable, and worsening outcomes — that started me, very reluctantly, down the long road to this seemingly paradoxical and widely misunderstood material.*

Then, back in '99-2000 I worked as a high-end audio/video technician out of the Canadian corporate–conference leader's max schmooze Banff / Bow-Valley office. (Before Alberta's good reputation, and the afterglow of the 88 Olympics began to get tarred and feathered...) *-* And after serving as a fly-on-the-wall at one 3-day solo gig — helping a billionaire pharmaceutical client's select Canadian Psychiatric 'thought leaders' learn about prescribing psych-drugs to children (HERE) — I can assure you, 'meatball subs' from undereducated footsoldiers^✝ is DEFINITELY NOT how wily pharmaceutical marketing execs make their real bones. [^✝see Oliver, above]

(That became really clear after a couple evenings in the hot-tub, the cigar lounge, our private wood-fired cabins... and a few days of peer-to-peer discussion.

Peer-to-peer discussion that justified, legitimized (camouflaged), and set the stage for the true — subtle — purpose of the event: the smoothest (short and sweet) gut-shot soft-sell I'd ever seen. Followed-up, leisurely, with some private murder-mystery diner theatre, parachuted-in for a feel-good chaser.

[ Note the golden rule of marketing and sales:  

"People don't remember what you say (or do), they remember how you make them feel." ]

I recorded the discussions, manned the microphone levels and, as usual, soaked-up a fair bit of disparate knowledge — sifted from hubris and b.s.

Speaking of which, the best spare-no-expense data my soft-sales master could muster (and pitch), showed what I at the time thought were OUTRAGEOUSLY LARGE placebo effects — in all categories of diagnosis. Like 80 to 85% in depression and anxiety.

-- -- -- -- --

[*pps: Again — just to be clear: Whitaker's book has NOTHING to do with throwing effective drug use under the bus.]

---

[...Speaking of effective drug use:

Ben Goldacre: 'What doctors don't know about drugs' (Ted Talk)]

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -



(Thanks for your interest,
and all the best.)

“Possibilianism”, Faith and Idealism

David Eagleman on 'Possibilianism'









Rabbi David Wolpe on 'Why Faith Matters'

“Freedom, however, is not the last word. Freedom is only part of the story and half of the truth. ... In fact, freedom is in danger of degenerating into mere arbitrariness unless it is lived in terms of responsibleness.”

 - Viktor Frakl

Viktor Frankl on 'Man's Search for Meaning' and the value of 
extending the highest of expectations to others.**





Post Scripts

“During the past thirty years, people from all civilized countries of the earth have consulted me ... Among all my patients in the second half of life -- that is to say, over thirty-five years -- there has not been one whose problem in the last resort was not that of finding a religious outlook on life. It is safe to say that every one of them fell ill because he had lost that which the living religions of every age have given their followers, and none of them had really been healed who did not regain his religious outlook.”

- Carl Jung    

“Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened." Since then I've spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I've read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened." ”

- Aleksander Solzhenitsyn      

“The capacity of the strenuous mood lies so deep down among our natural human possibilities that even if there were no metaphysical or traditional grounds for believing in a God, men would postulate one simply as a pretext for living hard, and getting out of the game of existence its keenest possibilities of zest. ... Every sort of energy and endurance, of courage and capacity for handling life's evils, is set free in those who have religious faith.”

- William James      

“When all is said and done, we are in the end absolutely dependent on the universe; and into sacrifices and surrenders of some sort, deliberately looked at and accepted, we are drawn and pressed as into our only permanent positions of repose. Now in those states of mind which fall short of religion, the surrender is submitted to as an imposition of necessity, and the sacrifice is undergone at the very best without complaint. In the religious life, on the contrary, surrender and sacrifice are positively espoused: even unnecessary givings-up are added in order that the happiness may increase. Religion thus makes easy and felicitous what in any case is necessary; and if it be the only agency that can accomplish this result, its vital importance as a human faculty stands vindicated beyond dispute. It becomes an essential organ of our life, performing a function which no other portion of our nature can so successfully fulfill.”

- William James     

Addendums

**Lesley Hazelton: Doubt [is an essential part of enlightenment]

(...And in zero-sum contests, discipline, defense, aggression and strategy, usually paramount.)

...
... ... ...
...

   

**William James: The Will to [choose to] Believe

“To be hopeful in bad times is not just foolishly romantic. It is based on the fact that human history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. What we choose to emphasize in this complex history will determine our lives. If we see only the worst, it destroys our capacity to do something. If we remember those times and places — and there are so many — where people have behaved magnificently, this gives us the energy to act, and at least the possibility of sending this spinning top of a world in a different direction. And if we do act, in however small a way, we don’t have to wait for some grand utopian future. The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.”

- Howard Zinn      

PPS: ...expect you won't mind if I hold my peace re. the nuances of my personal (rational, considered) Jamesian approach to meaning and faith.^‡

 ^‡ Please and thank you (and / or -- you're welcome.)

(Thanks for your interest,
and all the best.)

Cancer Immunology & Reversal (Physician, Heal Thyself)

Preface


Ten years ago a friend's father-in-law / friend's Dad / friend got a death sentence from an aggressive inoperable brain tumour, with no effective treatment.

Not being really close I listened from afar for updates: It began with “he's fighting it,” six months later moved to “still alive!”-- as in, still fighting (determined to live) -- and another 6 or 8 months after that, transitioned to "he's doing well"-- as in, it's a bloody miracle.(!)

Fast forward a few years and he's fit as a fiddle and telling me: “there's nothing left on the MRI but scar tissue.” (Bless him. And his.)

- - -

Not surprisingly his experience really stuck with me.

- - -

More recently, however, I had two very different experiences with conventional Oncology: First, with a very close relative; and then, more extensively, my Dad.

In both cases trust was placed firmly in the hands of the Oncologists, and treatment advice -- though largely hollow -- held to be the letter of the law.

Both did exactly as they were told, and, to my disappointment — and in my dad's case, by the end, borderline despondence,  ‡  — both died; sort of on schedule.

...

One of the first positive results to come of those unfortunate experiences is this unusual, personally cathartic, and unapologetically piece-meal post.

---

Food for Thought: 

(Optimism, Anecdote, and Abstraction)

“The immune system can respond to cancer cells in two ways: by reacting against tumor-specific antigens (molecules that are unique to cancer cells) or against tumor-associated antigens (molecules that are expressed differently by cancer cells and normal cells). ”      ...  “If properly activated by immunostimulatory tumor products or other factors in the tumor microenvironment, the dendritic cells induce effective tumor-specific CD4 and CD8 T cells.”       ...     “A recent study of three multicenter cohorts of 603 patients with colon cancer showed that the presence or absence of T cells in the resected tumor predicted the clinical outcome more accurately than tumor stage and nodal status, the current gold standards...Similar observations have been made in tumor specimens from patients with cervical cancer, breast cancer, urothelial carcinoma, and follicular lymphoma, as well as in lymph nodes draining the tumor site.”    ...     “A recent study examined 905 recipients of transplanted hearts, lungs, or both between 1989 and 2004 for the effect that immunosuppression, used for preventing graft rejection, had on the incidence of cancer. A total of 102 newly diagnosed cancers were detected in these patients, which is 7.1 times as many as in the general population. The predominant types were leukemias and lymphomas (26.2 times as many as in the general population), head and neck cancer (21 times as many) and lung cancer (9.3 times as many).”- (Cancer Immunology, O.J. Finn, New England Journal of Medicine, 2008.) 

Warburg Revisited


Anaerobic–Metabolic Tumour Stage-Setting
(In a nutshell:)

 
Cancer cells predominantly feed anaerobically (without oxygen) and are generally acidifying to the surrounding tissue.

Acidification makes this Warburg feeding more efficient, conventional metabolism less so, and reinforces the tumor's ability to feed.

[**see notes 're: acidification' under Dr Russell Jaffe, below]

Meanwhile anaerobic feeding is not unique to cancer cells: It's a useful mechanism many normal cells possess and can invoke as needed: e.g. When the balance of power (re. ATP energy production) is tipped away from the mitochondria (e.g. In exhausted muscle tissue, starved for oxygen and inundated with lactic acid.)

The mitochondria are the normal power plants (food suppliers) of the cell, and they're essential to apoptosis. ( -?- ) Apoptosis is our body's method of regulating the cell's life cycle: initiating 'cellular suicide' and cannibalizing redundant or damaged cells.

When and if apoptosis functions properly — executed by strong, healthy mitochondria (- ? -) — cancer is generally nipped not 'in the bud' but *in the seed.* ( -?-  'It' never really gets a chance to start.) And conversely, when conditions favour the alternative (Warburg?) and the mitochondria are under-powered (for any number of reasons), apoptosis is undermined (or -?- completely switched off) — the cell will generally reproduce and reproduce and reproduce.

 (-?-)


i.e. The stage is perfectly set for epigenetic*, monopolistic, cancerous expression.

--  --  --

More than 6 decades ago Otto Warburg proclaimed he "discovered the cause of cancer" after observing normal cells "becoming cancerous" when their oxygen supply was cut off. (Feeding anaerobically and multiplying uncontrollably -?- ) But because apoptosis wasn't understood until relatively recently it was impossible for anyone — including Warburg — to explain why the metabolic change (powering-down the mitochondria) actually caused this uncontrolled proliferation.

And as a result, sadly, his breakthrough spent six decades relegated to the metabolic margins of cancer research and thought.

--

[ * ps / btw:  Every cell in our bodies is the genetic descendant of a billion years or more of every-cell-for-itself (single celled) survival of the fittest:

i.e. Before our Great-Great-Great-Great (...) ancestors mutated into complex organisms (with mitochondria — and hierarchical communication and control) they were, for a very, very long time, single celled, anaerobic, cancer-ish amoebas. ]

Dr Russell Jaffe on inflammation repair deficits, and "The Alkaline Way".

[Patient friendly guide, including a ph food-table and a buffered-vitamin-C detox protocol (here), and 'Perque Integrative Health', the company he founded (here).]

[ ** re. acidification: (1) Beware all the fraudulent crap, re. alkalizing "miracle cures". (2) It's important to note that we're not talking about blood-ph (the popular alkaline straw-man); we're talking about tissue/cell micro-environments—and many different kettles of fish....

And (3) just drinking a little more good water (un-softened... every day) — and a little less coffee, booz and fancy crap — is probably the most common-sense thing many of us can (and should) do...

[**Here's a good place to kick-off an academic investigation into the complicated and increasingly fractious science of induced acidosis (not 'acidaemia'): Diet-induced acidosis: is it real and clinically relevant?, Pizzorno (2010).]

For a brief contrarian anecdote re. diets and cancer, see 'a contrarian anecdote', note 'iv', four-fifths down the page. (Below 'an Oncologist talks about nutrition'.)]

[ Peer-reviewed literature generally isn't what it's cracked up to be.]

Dr. Herbert Benson & Allan Greg: Timeless Healing: The Power and Biology of Belief (1996)


[ ‘If you think you can you might be right;
    if you think you can't you will be.’ ]


Note: Despite Dr. Benson insisting otherwise (then), it's now quite clear that suppression of the immune system from negative stress** and its consequences is nearly as sure-fire a method as there is for giving all diseases (including many cancers) a huge leg-up.

[**Here's a good recent post on stress, and positive ways to cope with change.]

Dr Mark Hyman:  

“ The answer[s] to our health care problems are not going to be found at the tip of a needle. They're not going to be found at the bottom of a pill bottle. They're going to be found at the tip of your fork. ”   

“ Food is medicine... Your grocery store should be your pharmacy... We have to stop mopping up the floor with symptom controlling treatments. We have to turn off the faucet.”

 
David Servan-Schreiber (author of 'Anti-Cancer: A New Way of Life').


ps: When Dr. Schreiber quotes the calcium & vitamin D study and says "ignore the calcium", personally, I *might* not. (Calcium, like potassium, magnesium and zinc, buffers excess acids. Which, if I'm not mistaken, supports the strength and health of the mitochondria. Which, in turn, undermines the 'Warburg effect': Which is how most cancers feed — and, perhaps, in many cases, get their epigenetic start.)  ...  The big worry with calcium supplements, i think, is cardiovascular... (Bad for the arteries in excess.)

... So ... eating foods naturally rich in all minerals—and again, drinking a little more good water and a little less fancy crap—is probably an even smarter way to go. (i.e. In addition to vitamin D through winter, and into old age.)

[ update: See the Addendum, a little ways down, for a brief take on calcium, D, K, and the heart.

 And again -- a contrarian's anecdote on diet (...), 'a contrarian anecdote' ('iv') below Donald Abrams on Nutrition (4/5ths down.)]

Tim Harford, trial and error, and 'the god complex' (aka hubris)



[ ‘The difference between learning and wisdom is the visceral
 growing-pain that distinguishes the latter.’]

  

Dr. Bernie Siegel shooting his mouth off in "Fight For Your Life" (1987)

“God has given us free will to make love and life meaningful. This creates a critical risk because we now have the ability to destroy our universe if we choose not to love.

However, it is only in this critical time that the archetype of the miracle can appear. When one believes in love and miracles divine intervention can occur. We have an infinite number of choices ahead, but a finite number of endings. They are destruction and death or, love and healing. If we choose the path of love, we save ourselves and our universe.

Let us choose love and life.”

- Dr Siegel's strange, abstract (and occasionally wonderful) 1986 best-seller, "Love, Medicine and Miracles" 

And here's a much more accessible old classic:

"Anatomy of an Illness as Perceived by the Patient",

by Norman Coisins (1915-1990)]

 

Lissa Rankin, TEDx, on Mind Body Healing (2012)  |  Her best selling book: 'Mind over Medicine'


[Again: ‘If you think you can, you might be right.
  If you think you can't, you will be.’ ]

Finding Hope Over Cancer

[Stephen Harper x Dr Phil, with a liberal education..]

Marilyn and Glen's story

Btw: the so-called "vitamin B17" ("amygdalin" / "laetrile", cyanide) narrative was a really long running (formerly profitable) ex-bootleggers' cancer scam.

Christina Pirello (and a link to her cooking website)

An oncologist (Dr. Donald Abrams) talks about nutrition.


NOTES


(i) Cutting down on omega 6 fats (e.g. canola oil, margarine, most vegetable oils, non-O3 eggs, peanuts, soy fat, corn fat...), supplementing  O3 fats (modestly -- with high quality refrigerated fish oil, almonds, flax, anchovies, grass-fed everything EXCEPT mercury laden high-order fish) and switching to a generally anti-inflammatory diet should, iyam, be a high priority for the vast majority of us.

[ The amount of omega 6 fats in the average 's.a.d.' diet (standard american diet) is so off the charts (thanks to corn, canola, and soy...) most of us can make a HUGE positive difference in o-3 to o-6 ratios just by steering clear of crap vegetable fats (cheap oils), buying olive oil in bulk (o-9) and using traditional (saturated) fats like butter and coconut oil where appropriate. ... And relearning grandma's scratch-cooking for dressings, sauces, and you name it.) ]

(ii) (Thankfully) Bovine growth hormone was not approved for use in Canada; thanks to a couple of great scientists at Health Canada who took a principled stand (and were -- revoltingly -- fired because of it.)

(iii) re: intelligent supplementation: (in case you missed it) a recent study found that vitamin D and calcium lowered cancer rates by 60-77% in 1100 post-menopausal American women.

If vitamin d and calcium could be patented (monopolized), and sold for $1500 a bottle they'd easily have been branded the most revolutionary cancer breakthrough in history. (Along side vitamin c, garlic, and good friends.)

Addendum(s), 2018:  (1)  Recent, rigorous results demonstrated a 25% reduction in cancer death across-the-board from D alone; BUT also a small but noteworthy uptick in heart attack death.

Turns out one of vitamin D's key roles is increasing the absorption and mobility of calcium (presumably the reason for the first big study...), and this appears to elevate heart calcification in a handful of extra D peeps.

ps:  Solid evidence that Vitamin K2 plays a key role in helping to stave this off. (Still learning, but basically -- AVOID EXCESS -- and, obviously, take care of your heart: i.e. Reduce excessive calcium; exercise; and watch the hell out for super-high amounts of trans-fat.)

Oh, and ...  (2)  # Not a doctor:  -  obviously.

...  ...  ...  ...  ...  ...  ...  ...
 Speaking of which...
...  ...  ...  ...  ...  ...  ...  ...



(iv) A contrarian anecdote on diets and cancer:
     (Take with a silo of salt.)


My Dad, at first, made something of a 'miraculous' recovery.

After a few days in the hospital (stuck in bed), and quite a few bags of much needed blood, he began to develop an "I can do it; To hell with it; What have I got to lose" attitude towards his otherwise bleak predicament.

The odds weren't good for his particular sub-type of acute myloid leukemia. And yet, while others with similar or better prognoses — but much more solemn dispositions — ate by the book and got worse (failing to achieve remission), my dad, with his "I'm going to beat it", relaxed earnest optimism picking-up steam, ate whatever he felt like (literally), and recovered.

[ E.g. a large Tim's morning coffee (first thing, every morning); tons of chocolate milk and orange juice; caesar salad, bacon, rhubarb pie, lasagna, summer sausage, roast beef, fruit salad, ice cream, schnitzel on a bun, 5 year old cheddar... you get the idea...]

And again, while others with the same diagnosis, doctor, treatment and prognosis — but much more fearful, solemn ("realistic") dispositions — failed to achieve remission (dying within months), my dad sailed through his treatment — relatively speaking — and enjoyed 8 or 9 months, post cancer, of a preliminary retirement career.

(Albeit, briefly.***)

*** His health lasted every bit as long as his optimism.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

( btw:  ‡ We had a fair bit more than cancer to resolve. )

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Long story -- you don't want to hear.

---

William Donald Kelley* (a patient's memorial)


Kelley was an obsessive, half-crazy, (southern Pentecostal or Baptist) Orthodontist who 'found' religion (again — scared sh*tless) while waging and ultimately winning a lengthy battle with untreatable pancreatic cancer.

He went on to make remarkable strides by trial and error, and developed an individualized, dietary / metabolic / detox / immunological / everything AND the-kitchen-sink approach to treatment...

After attempting to treat Steve McQueen's (the 1960's Hollywood star's) terminal cancer he became a whipping boy for the popular press — and was irrevocably branded as a quack.

This despite (1) there having been no conventional treatment available for McQueen's cancer; (2) McQueen actually having died of a heart attack, under anesthesia; And (3), McQueen's surgeon (whose operation precipitated the heart attack) having reported that McQueen's tumor had significantly decreased in size.  ...

By the 80s Kelley, an unlicensed outlaw, was was dividing his patients into some 9-ish different metabolic / disease profiles. (And at least three of which he'd begun to regard as "definite meat eaters" --  recognizing the critical importance of protein and animal fats within certain health / disease profiles.) ...

--

The pancreatic enzyme theory was based on the work of a Scottish Embryologist, John Beard.
Who observed -- over a century ago -- that the growth of a baby's umbilical cord 'resembles that of cancer'; with its rapid growth and "invasion of the mother, in search of a blood supply." And, moreover, seemed to cease growth (in his observation) "precisely when the baby's pancreas begins producing enzymes."

Beard's theories were published in 1905 as "The Trophoblast Theory of Cancer", and in 1911 as "The Enzyme Treatment of Cancer".

(Presumably Kelly stumbled onto Beard while trying to save himself -- and understandably latched onto it as the best, believable theoretical framework around.

(One that appeared, then, to have been largely ignored.)  ...

For what it's worth, ... last I checked Beard and Kelly's unlikely successors, Dr Nicholas Gonzalez and Dr Linda Isacs, still had the best clinical and published results of any treatment protocol for inoperable pancreatic cancer.* 

And — even more unlikely (??) : It turns out Drs Gonzalez and Isacsons' standard dietary prescription for blood and immune cancers (?) like my dad's leukemia (??) "High animal protein and high fat."*

(Which he, of course, thoroughly enjoyed during the 'to hell with it', smorgasbord days that kicked off the better part of his last year of life.)

--

Again, *take all this with an appropriate silo of salt. 

e.g. mineral rich sea-salt -- on veggies, nuts and greens; with a kelp supplement for iodine (and washed down with a tall drink of northern Ontario ground water. 

: - o )

[ For more on crazy Kelley -- and Gonzalez -- see the intro to Gonzalez's book on Kelley.]

“Kostoglotov [said], "All I'm saying is that we shouldn't behave like rabbits and put our complete trust in doctors. For instance, I'm reading this book." He picked up a large, open book from the windowsill. "Abrikov and Stryukov, Pathological Anatomy, medical school textbook. It says here that the link between the development of tumours and the central nervous system has so far been very little studied. And this link is an amazing thing! It's written here in so many words." He found the place. "It happens rarely, but there are many cases of self induced healing.' You see how it's worded? Not recovery through treatment, but, actual healing, See?"

There was a stir throughout the ward. It was as though "self induced healing" had fluttered out of the great open book like a rainbow-coloured butterfly for everyone to see, and they all held up their foreheads and cheeks for its healing touch as it flew past. "Self-induced," said Kostoglotov, laying aside his book. He waved his hands, fingers splayed..."That means that suddenly for some unexplained reason the tumor starts off in the opposite direction! It gets smaller, resolves and finally disappears! See?”

- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's "Cancer Ward"

-    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -    -



(Thanks for your interest,
and all the best.)