RE: A CURE? MAYBE

[Guest guest]

The bottom line seems strange to me because as far as I know even the most open

minded naturopaths say that the dosage needs to be up to 600 mcg of selenium and

that more than that is toxic. Any comments?

Iris

From: beeh2003

SELENIUM: GOOD NEWS IN CANCER TREATMENT

.......A NOTE: THE DOSAGE IF MY CALCULATIONS ARE CORRECT, FOR THE ABOVE REGIMEN,

IS 6.9 MG PER DAY OF SELENIUM OR 6900 MCG. IS THAT EXCESSIVE, AND WHAT SIDE

EFFECTS OTHER THAN CAUSING THE CANCER TO " REGRESS " WOULD BE SEEN?

[Guest guest]

Greetings,

While I don't know much about selenium, I do understand that

sometimes our bodies need what for a 'normal' person would be

toxic. For example, about the time I had melanoma, I was suffering

from severe migraines and my eyesight was rapidly deteriorating. A

friend suggested 2500IU of vitamin A a day, which I did for 2

weeks. I felt great so with my doctors agreement, I stayed at that

dosage for 18 months. The radiologist noticed a massive reduction in

the scar tissue in my lungs, [i've had pneumonia over 50 times, lost

count about there.] I can see in the dark, the migraines are gone, my

skin looks younger and I feel great. That treatment should have

killed me by all the literature, but my body needed the vitamin A.

I have come to understand that each of us is different, and there is

no one size fits all to what our bodies need.

Bright Blessings,

Kim

At 11:25 AM 10/27/2006, you wrote:

>The bottom line seems strange to me because as far as I know even

>the most open minded naturopaths say that the dosage needs to be up

>to 600 mcg of selenium and that more than that is toxic. Any comments?

>Iris

>

>

[Guest guest]

Kim: What form of vitamin A were you taking, and do you

mean 25,000 units or 2,500?

jp

From: Kim

....about the time I had melanoma, I was suffering

> from severe migraines and my eyesight was rapidly deteriorating. A friend

suggested 2500IU of vitamin A a day, which I did for 2

> weeks. I felt great so with my doctors agreement, I stayed at that dosage for

18 months. The radiologist noticed a massive reduction in the scar tissue in my

lungs, [i've had pneumonia over 50 times, lost count about there.] I can see in

the dark, the migraines are gone, my skin looks younger and I feel great. That

treatment should have killed me by all the literature, but my body needed the

vitamin A. I have come to understand that each of us is different, and there is

no one size fits all to what our bodies need.

[Guest guest]

Kim: I know a physician on the West Coast who once told me " I shouldn't

tell you this but I take 300000 units of vitamin a every day and have been

doing it for over 20 years. I do my blood every 10-14 days and there is nothing

approaching a bio-insult. "

For many years I have contacted all the " experts " who claim toxicity for

vita and d. Where are the scientific studies showing toxicity, I ask. They

always refer me to someone else who says the vitamins are toxic.

A. Hoffer has stated he doesn't think selenium is nearly as toxic as

alleged. And, sometimes, gives his patients large doses with benefit.

Take all of the " experts " advice with a grain of salt.

Ken

[Guest guest]

Greetings,

I was taking three, 8000 I.U gel caps a day. Ingrediants: soybean

oil, gelatin[non-bovine] glycerin, fish liver oil, water.

Bright Blessings,

Kim

At 12:32 PM 10/27/2006, you wrote:

>Kim: What form of vitamin A were you taking, and do you

>mean 25,000 units or 2,500?

>jp

[Guest guest]

I once met a man who played with rattlesnakes and claimed he was bitten more

than 1000 times in his life. He further claimed it made him stronger and

better in every way. One person doing something foolish is not a real good

indication that you should also do what he does.

Pubmed.com has 2137 listings for " vatamin A toxicity " and 1913 entries for

" selenium toxicity. " It took less than 2 minutes to pull these responses

up from the time I read your email. Perhaps you should spend some time

reading about these before you make such irresponsible generalizations about

what is safe and what is not. Short term dosing (and overdosing) of many

supplements, nutrients and vitamins are usually well tolerated by your body

in spite of yourself. But how many of those heavily dosed selenium patients

kept it up for extended periods of time? Did they all show marked

improvement? Did they all get rid of their cancer? Try asking some

followup questions. These are just a couple of quickies that pop to mind.

I am sure, there are a bunch more that could be asked including what happens

to other minerals and supplements in your body when you OD on just one such

as selenium or Vitamin A? Many times the OD situation will cause a lot of

other problems down the road. Vit D, for instance, in massive dosage will

pull calcium and magnesium from your bones eventually and create an

ostioporosis problem unless you counter-balance the heavy vit D intake.

Short term, you will not notice anything out of the ordinary. The same

holds true if you take lots of calcium supplements for extended periods of

time without counter - balancing the effects with sufficient vit D and

magnesium. Most things don't just flop around inside your body without

having some effect on several if not hundreds of other things at one time.

I do not have time to go through and sort all 4100+ articles out because

just those 2 words in the search string will bring back both high levels and

low levels toxicity problems. But there will be sufficient evidence to give

you some examples as to why you do not necessarily want to jump off the same

bridge as the two examples given. For instance, excessive vitamin A intake

and possible toxicity that would increase the risk of Cistic

Fibrosis-associated liver and bone complications is a consideration. Nothing

to do with cancer, but certainly a valid consideration.

When it comes to cancer, your body is definately out of balance. Simply

looking for one thing to right all the wrongs is really a very foolish way

to " find a cure " . You obviously can do whatever you like, but common sense

should tell you that some amount of reasonable research is required before

just doing simply because one person can do it and survive. I am not

looking for hours of needless debate on the issue. I have a lot of other

real problems to tackle. I just hate to see people make wild irrational

statements without doing any homework whatsoever.

Again, what works for one person will not necessarily work for another. In

the case of your doctor, there may be a valid physiological reason he can

injest excessive amounts with no problem. But why after all these years is

he still testing himself every week and a half? That would be the other

question I would ask.

By the way, the snake handler died about 10 months ago when an eastern

diamond-back hit him in the neck. I guess his years of strengthening his

body wern't just quite enough to take that final jolt. Oh well...

Bruce Guilmette, PhD

Survive Cancer Foundation, Inc.

http://survivecancerfoundation.org <http://survivecancerfoundation.org/>

Do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day

has enough trouble of its own. Matt 6:34 (NIV)

_____

From: [mailto: ] On

Behalf Of Lwayok@...

Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 5:49 PM

Subject: Re: [ ] A CURE? MAYBE

Kim: I know a physician on the West Coast who once told me " I shouldn't

tell you this but I take 300000 units of vitamin a every day and have been

doing it for over 20 years. I do my blood every 10-14 days and there is

nothing

approaching a bio-insult. "

For many years I have contacted all the " experts " who claim toxicity for

vita and d. Where are the scientific studies showing toxicity, I ask. They

always refer me to someone else who says the vitamins are toxic.

A. Hoffer has stated he doesn't think selenium is nearly as toxic as

alleged. And, sometimes, gives his patients large doses with benefit.

Take all of the " experts " advice with a grain of salt.

Ken

[Guest guest]

Hi Bruce and list,

There are instances, such as with cases of aggressive and relatively advanced

cancers, that corrective measurments alone will not quite cut it.

Corrective treatments that are compatible with the biochemical pathways of the

body, are not always by themselves a sufficient solution. This is when the short

term use of distortive therapy or protocol (many times in conjunction with

corrective therapies) just may be able to buy precious time and to bring to a

halt a disease that is at its pre-terminal stage ( learned all about the terms

distortive and corrective from my friend and mentor Gammill who I

believe to be a great therapist). This is particularly true for cancers that no

longer respond to corrective means only, or when the patient has a long history

of chemotherapy and multiple drug resistance has developed.

Some examples:

If a cancer patient suffers from cachexia (20lb -30lb underweight) and is

extremely frail, I don't think that going on the breuss anti-cancer diet would

be a good choice; if anything it will hasten his demise. This is the same diet

that indeed in many many cases was able to stop the progression of cancer.

No one, no healthy body need to have 70-100 grams of ascorbate injected into it

5-6 days a week for a month or so.

Nonetheless, high dose iv ascorbate with vitamin k has (along with other things

used) demonstrated some remarkable recoveries and reversals of advanced cancers.

BTW Bruce, based on the medical experience of Levy MD, an infussion of

120 Grams of ascorbate could have possibly saved this snake handler's life

While our bodies do need to maintian some level of methylglyoxal to stay

healthy, no healthy body ever needs to take

8 ml of 0.45 M methylglyoxal diluted in 60 ml of water 4 times a day. Non the

less, this amount of methylglyoxal has been able to reverse advanced cancers and

improve quality of life for some terminal cancer patients.

....and one can go on and on about 30-40 mg of melatonin, 9-10 gr of curcumin

etc.

Yes, the same logic applies for many other natural substances and herbs used in

the treatment of cancer, including vitamin A, selenium and many more. In fact,

many herbs and natural substances that are in use for healing cancer are dose

dependant, and therefor in order for them to be effective, one needs to reach a

level that is just below toxicity.

....so while it is true that high dosage and long term use of many of the

anti-cancer supplements and herbs may have, as you correctly wrote, negative

effects on our bodies, this, in and of itself, does not deem ineffective their

short term use, in curing or bringing cancer into remission. In fact, they are

extremely valuable tools.

Once the cancer is brought under control, there can be more of a shift towards

corrective and immune therapies.

Gubi

www.cure-cancer-naturally.com

Re: [ ] A CURE? MAYBE

Kim: I know a physician on the West Coast who once told me " I shouldn't

tell you this but I take 300000 units of vitamin a every day and have been

doing it for over 20 years. I do my blood every 10-14 days and there is

nothing

approaching a bio-insult. "

For many years I have contacted all the " experts " who claim toxicity for

vita and d. Where are the scientific studies showing toxicity, I ask. They

always refer me to someone else who says the vitamins are toxic.

A. Hoffer has stated he doesn't think selenium is nearly as toxic as

alleged. And, sometimes, gives his patients large doses with benefit.

Take all of the " experts " advice with a grain of salt.

Ken

[Guest guest]

I am now working with a woman who previously treated her breast

cancer (with bone mets throughout) who was treated for several months

with 100grams daily of ascorbate. Her tumor markers continued to

rise and her cancer grew during this period. She felt healthy and

looked healthy. I do think that the vitamin C acted in her much like

sugar -- perhaps because of a high load of catalase and glutathione

peroxidase. Too many people overdo it on the enzymes. It is hard

to find a cancer treatment that is not a two-edged sword.

>No one, no healthy body need to have 70-100 grams of ascorbate

>injected into it 5-6 days a week for a month or so.

>Nonetheless, high dose iv ascorbate with vitamin k has (along with

>other things used) demonstrated some remarkable recoveries and

>reversals of advanced cancers.

[Guest guest]

Greetings,

This just proves the point, that no two bodies are exactly the

same. If we want to be healthy, we must listen to our own bodies and

what they are telling us. Not just how I feel today, but listen to

the inner voice of your body that says, 'hey that was nice, but don't

you dare do it again' or 'yes, yes, yes, give me more of that'.

I have since discovered that if my omega 3s get too low, I no longer

synthesize vitamin A from my food, no matter what I eat. A

correction to my diet of eating 100% grass fed raw milk as well as

only 100% grass fed beef and lamb have cured the problem.

If a deficiency exists, it must be filled, but it is as important to

find out why the deficiency exists in the first place.

Doctors and medical advise can help with general guidelines, but each

of us is responsible for our decisions as it is our body. No one

else can know how something affects us, only we can.

Bright Blessings,

Kim

At 09:29 AM 10/28/2006, wrote:

>I am now working with a woman who previously treated her breast

>cancer (with bone mets throughout) who was treated for several months

>with 100grams daily of ascorbate. Her tumor markers continued to

>rise and her cancer grew during this period. She felt healthy and

>looked healthy. I do think that the vitamin C acted in her much like

>sugar -- perhaps because of a high load of catalase and glutathione

>peroxidase. Too many people overdo it on the enzymes. It is hard

>to find a cancer treatment that is not a two-edged sword.

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Gubi,

thank you for your thoughts. I wholeheartedly agree. To expand on

your reasoning:

a branch of " alternative " modalities known as orthomolecular medicine

that explicitly specializes in using natural substances in unnatural

amounts and in unnaturally pure/concentrated form is usually

associated with things like megadoses of vitamins and free-form amino

acids, with names like Linus ing, and with organizations like the

Life Extension Foundation. However, a careful look at the tools

employed by both " all-natural " and " all-unnatural " practitioners and

the " in-between " orthomolecular ones reveals their striking

similarities below the surface of a seemingly profound ideological

conflict.

The similarity lies in the fact that any therapeutic intervention that

in its " all-natural " form could have been simply part of a healthy

lifestyle for a healthy human being has to be exaggerated, enhanced,

condenced, magnified before it can be use as a WEAPON against cancer.

Anyone who drinks ten to sixteen glasses of vegetable juice per day

is NOT doing anything " natural " by any stretch of imagination.

Rather, this person is concentrating a few pounds of what he or she

might otherwise have " naturally " consumed in a month or a year or a

decade or not at all, turning it into a " distortive tool of

correction " ! What is so very natural about using natural substances

in unnatural amounts in unnaturally purified form, be it juice from a

juicy herb like lettuce or an alkaloid from an aklaloid-rich plant

like periwinkle, also known as Vinblastin? What's so very natural

about mixing cottage cheese with massive amounts of flax seed oil, a

dish that is not an organic and natural part of any cuisine anywhere

in the world, unlike a salad or a steak? What's so very unnatural

about a blood transfusion -- blood is natural, isn't it? What's so

very natural about a Rife machine compared to a dialysis machine?

Where does one draw the line, and is it necessary at all to draw it?

The line itself is artificial, unnatural, the distinction is a fairy

tale. In real medicine, REAL medicine no longer readily available on

either side of the tracks to most people, no one ever thought of

making such a distinction. Throughout medical history of the world,

up until the business decision about how " scientific " medicine would

be formulated and presented to the doctors and the public alike so as

to profit its owners the most, this line never existed, for lack of

material substantiation for it in the real world. Natural substances

were used in unnatural concentrations via all manner of unnatural

methods four, five, six thousand years ago. What's so natural about

Ayurveda's six-thousand-year-old method of blood transfusion using a

water buffalo's stomach for the container, a segment of its intestines

for the feeding tube inserted into the patient's stomach, and animal

blood used instead of our current human blood? What's so natural

about an enema? What's so unnatural about a canula an MD will use to

wash out hardened ear wax and cure some cases of deafness compared to

the colonic machine an " all-natural " colon hydrotherapist will use to

wash out hardened you-know-what and cure some cases of constipation?

The only unnatural thing to do is to support the artificial division

of medicine into " natural " and " unnatural, " a division with no

precedent in the history of human medicine until the advent of

Rockefeller-Carnegie medicine in the early part of the twentieth

century. People who position themselves in the " us " camp against the

" them " camp should, in my humble opinion, pay more attention to the

criteria they use to separate the two, and it's time to notice that

the " natural-unnatural " distinction is artificial and unnatural. The

real distinction between " us " and " them " is elsewhere... but I will

let someone else guess where exactly.

Best,

Elena

Gubi wrote:

>Hi Bruce and list,

>There are instances, such as with cases of aggressive and relatively

advanced cancers, that corrective measurments alone will not quite cut

it.........Some examples:

> If a cancer patient suffers from cachexia (20lb -30lb underweight)

and is extremely frail, I don't think that going on the breuss

anti-cancer diet would be a good choice; if anything it will hasten

his demise. This is the same diet that indeed in many many cases was

able to stop the progression of cancer.

> No one, no healthy body need to have 70-100 grams of ascorbate

injected into it 5-6 days a week for a month or so. Nonetheless, high dose iv

ascorbate with vitamin k has (along with other things used) demonstrated some

remarkable recoveries and reversals of advanced cancers..........

>...so while it is true that high dosage and long term use of many of

the anti-cancer supplements and herbs may have, as you correctly

wrote, negative effects on our bodies, this, in and of itself, does

not deem ineffective their short term use, in curing or bringing

cancer into remission. In fact, they are extremely valuable tools.

> Once the cancer is brought under control, there can be more of a

shift towards corrective and immune therapies.

>

[Guest guest]

It seems that somewhere in what I wrote I commented that the body will

withstand most things SHORT TERM on an overdose level, but it is foolish to

just do it because one person thinks it might work. If you have the

chemistry background and enough of a medical background to understand the

ramifications of what you are doing, that is one thing. But to blindly put

out that O-Dosing on supplements is probably a relatively harmless thing is

not a good plan. There are just too many variables to make statements of

that nature with no qualifiers.

I also think it inappropriate to make the statement that there is no

research available as to overdosing on the items listed. That was the final

straw in that if I could find over 4,000 articles in 2 minutes, then making

a statement that there is no documentation is certainly misleading.

I do not consider it a wise plan for anyone including a doctor to have spent

20 years ingesting vit A in such large quantities. That is an irrational

form of behavior and if people are led into the false belief that they can

indeed get away with things of this nature in general, a lot more damage

will probably be done than good.

As I also noted before, I really don't have time to get into everything

concerning long term high dosage because I have 2 major research projects

running. I just do not like blanket statements tending toward what can be

dangerous practices to stand out there without some form of cautionary

warning.

As to the snake handler, from what I was told he lasted about 3 minutes. I

seriously doubt that high dose vit C would have done much for him. The

toxins found in most snake venom require quite a bit more than just

antioxidants to stop them if they are concentrated and in a vital area.

Bruce Guilmette, PhD

Survive Cancer Foundation, Inc.

http://survivecancerfoundation.org <http://survivecancerfoundation.org/>

Do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day

has enough trouble of its own. Matt 6:34 (NIV)

<http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=106033/grpspId=1705061620/msgId=

23179/stime=1162027793/nc1=3848443/nc2=4025370/nc3=4044343>