New England Journal of
Medicine Hammers Chemo,
Applauds Alternative
Cancer Therapy
Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

Times are a-changin' in the US Health community. Who would have believed that the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine would APPLAUD an Alternative Cancer Therapy, and in the same article, BLAST chemotherapy, as worthless. 
Well, it happened... in the December 12th, 2002 issue, in a review by James Spencer Malpas, M.D., D.Phil. St. Bartholomew's Hospital London EC1A 7BE, United Kingdom You can find the article in the Journal at, if you're willing to fork over the ten bucks.
For those of you that don't want to spend the ten, here are the quotes...
Quote #1 - "He found the evidence in favor of conventional treatment unconvincing and opted for such alternative therapies as Gerson therapy with its strict diet, vitamins, and enemas. High-dose vitamin C and high-dose vitamin D, both contraindicated in the orthodox treatment of multiple myeloma, were later added to the regimen. What is evident is that this was the right therapy for him."
Quote #2 - "The irony of the whole situation is that a recent randomized trial of treatment for stage 1 multiple myeloma by Riccardi and colleagues (British Journal of Cancer 2000;82:1254-60) showed no advantage of conventional chemotherapy over no treatment."
Well, well... That ought to escalate the "quackbuster's" demise... Even the New England Journal has turned their back on their ludicrous assertions....
Your Comments Are Always Welcome At!


This Site Served by TheHostPros