Any thoughst on Dr. Heinrich Theory of the cause of cancer and also could there be any relationship in some to the bone marrow environment?
Any thought on Dr. Heinrich Theory of the cause of cancer: http://www.slideshare.net/KangenWaterH2O/dr-otto-heinrich-warburg-1931-nobel-prize-winner-the-root-cause-of-cancer
Posted 27 May 2012 - 06:56 PM
I kinda thought it was junk too.
However I have heard some others mention this theory, especially my brother - in- law who was diagnosed with Osteo Sarcoma in 2006. Interestingly in that he takes no prescription pills of any kind (at this time). He thinks he can beat this cancer because of all his alternative medicine herbs.
He was 69 when he was diagnosed and had his knee removed and several inches of the muscle. He was a military vet and in good health otherwise, so they gave him the most chemo you could give anyone. But two year after knee replacement, it came back in the lungs, so lungs surgery. Then another two years later back in the lungs so another lung surgery and radiation. No more chemo doc said it would only give him 5 % to 15 % chance of doing any good. Well it has been anther two years and so far no signs of the cancer. He still thinks it is his good fortune to lick this cancer with his herbs and he truly believe in the theory above. I think his hemoglobin is great at 12 but he wants it above 14 for the oxygen levels. He did say he didn't eat meat mainly because of the way the animals are raised and also because the protein is to hard on his liver.
I am doing the Curcumin but still taking the Gleevec. It has only been a few weeks since taking it but hoping it will make a difference in my next (2nd labs) at Indiana Univ. Fingers Crossed. If it works, I hope I can eventually lower my dose.
Anyhow thanks for the feed back.
Posted 29 May 2012 - 02:21 PM
I did take time to view the slides, it is always interesting to see what they said in 1931 or any thoughts from years back. I personally have run for 25 years and many marathons, I don't smoke and have stayed at a BMI of 22 and body fat percentage of about 23-25. So if the slides were true I would not be writing right now. I did not like the slides because of the fact they wanted to deny certain food groups. All are necessary but within limits. Glucose can enter the kreb cycle and create energy, fat does not. White sugar and fat must be reduced in the American diet. We must be careful of what the internet has to offer along with information that is given even here on our website. I have been reduced to 200mg of Gleevec but that is not for everyone. Dosage is adjusted by the physician after looking at you as a person and your labs and information. I have learned so much on this site but mostly I have used to as a reference for me to do further study, except for Trey's postings, I love them he has done so much homework for all of us, Thank you Trey.
I do like that fact that this was posted, I enjoyed seeing them because I take them in stride.
Posted 29 May 2012 - 02:52 PM
I think it is a good reminder of how 'real science' can be used to peddle junk theories often perpetuated by the scientist themselves. Vitamin C anyone? He didn't discover the 'root cause' but rather elucidated the environment of tumor cells and extrapolated very broadly from that basis.
There is so much Woo around that it's good to have discussions about misguided or incomplete theory's.
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1931 was awarded to Otto Warburg "for his discovery of the nature and mode of action of the respiratory enzyme". Not for
Understanding the physiology of cancer cells is a far cry from altering ones diet to 'cure' cancer. If only it were so easy
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users