I believe following teraphy with crizotinib will be challenging for your bro since he has Hepatitis B and that is related to liver injury.
One study reported that risk factors associated with crizotinib-induced liver injury are (i) the presence of liver disease or HBV carriers or (ii) the concurrent use of an H2-antagonist or H2-antagonist/proton pump inhibitors (PPIs; 21). Crizotinib is metabolized largely via cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 (18) and may have drug interactions with CYP3A4 inhibitors or inducers.
There is a protocol for hepatitis C put together by Dr. Burt Berkson, it doesn't matter if it is hepatitis b or C, you can still follow it.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10554539/
Also the Hepamerz Daniel mentions will be a great add.
Take care!
Dear friends,
My brother's liver counts have continued to rise despite taking half a dosage of crizotinib for one week now. ALT is now about 500, where up to 70 is normal. The oncologist said that if this continues, my brother has to stop crizotinib. There are no other TKI options available in Norway.
The oncologist said keep taking half dosage of crizotinib for another week, to see how it develops.
I received my order of Legalon (silybum marianum) today from eBay. The package seems to be in Russian. Have I actually received Legalon?
Am now awaiting Alpha lipoic acid. But uncertain on whether I should start my brother on selenium from what I have read. And Hepamerzt also uncertain because it could increase growth factors. Not good for cancer?
I know that you feel desperate.. . But you need to focus, right now your brother is dealing with liver toxicity and it is important to address that in the first place. Once the Liver enzymes are near normal levels you can start thinking about all the other aspects of cancer, being HBV positive while on crizotinib is a challenge of its own. You still have time to think about other ways to manage Cancer, your oncologist will tell you other ways.
Step 1: support the liver.
After achieving near normal transaminase Levels then try another strategy.
@yudaitheska @dng050 Totally agree! I would probably go for some high dose intravenous alpha lipoic acid sessions. Those should help to get back to normal the liver function relatively fast. Of course I would add Milk Thilste, Astragalus and Hepamertz. Probably, alternating cycles of TKI with liver support cycles could be a good strategy to move forward.
Kind regards,
Daniel
Thank you, friends.
Your posts have made me realize how dangerous the liver issues can be. Sometimes all my focus is on the cancer, and I forget to see the whole picture.
Since I was afraid the half dosage of crizotinib might give the cancer "free space", we added back modified citrus pectin, honokiol and melatonin to prevent metastasis. (Before, all supplements were stopped to see how the liver enzymes would develop). And besides milk thistle (Legalon) I realised I had r-lipoic acid - which I previously mistakenly thought was something different (or lower quality) than alpha-lipoic acid. After reading about it, we have also added r-lipoic acid to support the liver.
Best regards,
dng050
dng050, I am so glad for you that there are so many posters on forum that can offer you helpful advice to get your brother back to full treatment dosage as soon as possible. There are numerous challenges that need to be confronted when managing a complex illness such as cancer, it will be of great help that your friends on forum will be able to help you over these hurdles.
It is, as you noted, important to appreciate the seriousness of what might seem to be a somewhat peripheral concern. This was vividly demonstrated with the first 3-BP patient. This patient finally had a fatal response to 3-BP, though this was not actually directly related to the cancer itself. In fact, no live cancer cells were detectable at last labs; instead the liver was so overwhelmed trying to cope with the tumor remnants that liver failure occurred. This lesson needs to be emphasized: cancer treatment needs to be managed within the overall context of the health of the patient. It is reassuring to me that your previous comment recognizes the importance of this gestalt perspective.
I fully understand liver challenges - this is usually one of the main problems. Unfortunately, liver risk has been my main concern in treatments for my mother who, apart from her brain tumor, also suffers from hepatitis c.
As other colleagues already told you, milk thistle should be a fixture in all treatments. I always try to give several days off from drugs using large doses of milk thistle, artichokes and this syrup that seems very successful:
kind regards
Thanks, @manuone.
I guess it would be futile to eat artichokes to get enough of the relevant nutraceuticals - so one has to get the artichoke leaf extract as supplement? Or does your mother actually eat a lot of artichokes?
The syrup looks promising. I will add that to my brother's regimen.
Kind regards,
dng050
in the hands of people who believe cancer can be caused "in utero", meaning before birth.
I ment to write "in the hands of people who believe cancer can be caused by emotions from in utero". The fact that on the Dayspring website they add the word "ofcourse" to such a ridiculous statement, is even more troublesome. That's a ploy. Also, from what I've read more people have died from 3BP than it has saved lives. I have asked @jcancom for more information on the testimonials from Dayspring, the clinic he recommends to the OP, but without response.
Sorry, johan!! I did not mean to slight you; I just forgot.
Some of the assertions made by alternative medicine (in particular, Dayspring do give me concerns). We, on forum, with D's supervision, embrace a science based/evidence based perspective; when we post something, people can rightly ask us our source. Yet, with alternative medicine it can sometimes be more what one feels to be right. I am not comfortable with such an approach. However, my suspicion is that some of this non-rationality is almost required within the American system. It is not so much that Dayspring could not be more transparent about their results, but that they are prevented from presenting such evidence. Perhaps it could be seen as making medical claims without the necessary authority.
Dayspring does impress me, though. We have seen with responses by those on forum how effective metabolically enhanced chemo can be. Once you have a primary treatment, then intensifying with metabolic cotreatments can be powerful. What is impressive with Dayspring is that they don't use chemotherapy as their main line primary treatment: They use 3-BP. We on forum are still trying to reach this next stage.
In order to treat with a metabolic primary treatment, it is important to know what the limits are. After decades of experience with chemo, the maximal dose is likely known with some precision. However, with many metabolic approaches such knowledge is more difficult to acquire. It is less certain. This uncertainty can result in greatly reduced efficacy as people likely will undertreat. This can be seen with the history of vitamin C treatment in cancer. When they treated with 10 grams per day vitamin C in the 1970s it was likely seen as flamboyantly excessive. Yet, now even a 100 gram infusion might not seem extraordinary.
I am not comfortable with such an approach. However, my suspicion is that some of this non-rationality is almost required within the American system.
Required for who? For those trying to make money from desperate people?
Dayspring does impress me, though. We have seen with responses by those on forum how effective metabolically enhanced chemo can be. Once you have a primary treatment, then intensifying with metabolic cotreatments can be powerful. What is impressive with Dayspring is that they don't use chemotherapy as their main line primary treatment: They use 3-BP. We on forum are still trying to reach this next stage.
Have we really? In a response to the OT you write: "Consider Jess' example: https://www.cancertreatmentsresearch.com/case-report-stage-iv-pancreatic-cancer-good-news-from-jess/?highlight=Jess Look at the figure for the CA 19-9 marker, the first chemo round slowly brought down the cancer burden by ~95% from 11/1/2017 to 5/1/2018. As soon as the chemo was removed for a chemo holiday, the tumor entered a near vertical growth stage. On the second line of treatment, Jess added (to second line low-dose chemo) in many of the metabolic approaches that we have discussed endlessly about on forum, metronomic 2-DG, sali, 3-BP, fasting etc.. The response was then dramatic. As long as you have a binding chemo treatment available (a front line therapy), then other approaches can amplify it from there. This is where we are at with our understanding now."
However, here's an important response on Jess's post:
"Speaking from my experience of FOLFIRINOX and Gemcitabine + Abraxane combinations used for a loved one for
a Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma diagnosis.
Both these chemo regimen are first line/second line treatment for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma and shows excellent
results (in terms of activity on the tumours and reduction in CA 19-9 markers) on people who respond to these
drugs till the resistance kicks in. So in this case the drastic fall in the CA 19-9 markers after introducing
Abraxane with Gemcitabine is typically seen in a lot of people who respond to Chemo drugs and addition of Abraxane is very likely the key here."
Also, there hasn't been an update from Jess in over a year.
Dear friends,
I would like to share the treatment offers from two clinics which I have been in contact with:
1. Treatment plan from ChemoThermia Clinic (Turkey):
His treatment protocol will consist of Metabolically Supported Chemotherapy, Hyperthermia, Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy and Supportive Infusions together with a Ketogenic Diet and Supplements.
His treatment protocol will be for 10 days in every 3 weeks so he will be receiving treatment at our clinic for 10 days and rest for around 10 days.
He will receive a 10 day cycle for 5 times in 3 months of time and then a new PET-CT scan will be done for treatment response evaluation. Accordingly further treatment and follow up will be planned.
The cost of his initial evaluation (PET-CT Scan, Blood Counts and Consultation) will be 1.250 EUR and each 10-day treatment protocol cost will be 9.500 EUR
So overall cost of full treatment would amount to appr. 50 000 EUR.
2. From the dr. Ralf Kleef Integrative Immune Oncology (Germany) we have been given this cost estimation for possible treatment:
Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors
Variety of hyperthermia treatments
Fevertherapy IL-2
High Dose Vitamin C ,
Treatment period of 4-5 weeks with daily treatments
The calculation would be approximately 50.000€
I think we should go for the metabolic approach since that is what I am most familiar with, but I need to do more research on immunotherapy before we decide.
Kind regards,
dng050
@johan Dear Johan,
As you know I very much appreciate your contribution and friendship here during the past years. We all have our way of seeing things in life and according to that our different approaches. Some of us can be more enthusiastic while others less. Regardless of that, in my view, the most important point that brings us here are our intentions. We don't know each other. Some of us disclose their identity others not. But beyond that, after all these years of activity on this Blog we can have a good feeling on the profile and intentions of each of us.
By now, I do have a good trust in you and J and other core contributors that are active on this website. Finally, beyond trust we can use scientific and real-life facts to support our statements, regardless if they are more or less enthusiastic.
Next to that, we have to understand that life has more to it. It's not just black and white, and when it comes to cancer is often somewhere in between that.
By now, I can say that I have a fair amount of experience both clinical and scientific that comes from tousends of hours of reading scientific literature and direct contact with patients and clinicians and above all own direct and intensive experience. Based on all these, and not a single or a few cases, I can state that in most of the cases whoever is doing more receives more.
As long as we are not biased pro or against conventional and natural treatments, and as long as we do our job in understanding and implementing correctly the new scientific findings, we will receive more. How more? That is in the hands of God. But that is the grey area that I am referring to. That is equal to "more".
J is very enthusiast about metabolic treatments and I very much like his enthusiasm. Non of us know everything but together we will know more. Regarding the clinics, I do not feel Oncothermia (or what was the name of that clinic in Turkey) is playing fair and clear with the results - sounds a lot more like marketing but I do not have input enough to judge, after all these years I am still not totally clear about the position of Dayspring but I do believe strongly in metabolic treatments as beyond the overwhelming available science I've seen them working for some people.
Unfortunately I do not have the time to update all the cases. I work alone with the website to help the whole world there are not enough hours in a day to do everything. Sometimes everything becomes so overwhelming like these days when I received so many e-mails and everyone was asking for a response fast. That is why we need to find ways to expand and convert into a professional version of what was started here.
As a result, I did not had the time to updated anymore the situation of people that reported their case here like Don, Marcos, Manuel, and Jess.
With Jess I was in contact intensively during those times and she is an amazing person. She even fly to another continent to bring the drugs that someone else needed so much that she met via this Blog. She figted so much for her dear father to save him and she employed many treatments. The doctors were amazed with the fast drop of the markers during that time.After a while the markers have stabilised at a low level. Latter that had an infection that unbalanced immediately everything as they had to stop many of their treatments since the father had to go to the hospital to address that. Latter the tumor came back at the liver and Jess flue to Germany to perform trans arterial chemo embolisation which helped a little but not enough and unfortunately Jess lost her dear dad. This is why she did not updated anymore. But this is why things are not black or white. You don't just use 3BP or whatever and bum you are cancer free. We are speaking here about one of the major challenge of humanity not about a minor injury, as you very well know. For many this is a serious fight, for some it could be more easy sometimes.
Manuel and Marcos employed a lot of metabolic and natural treatments, next to conventional ones, and they know how serious this fight is. But because of doing this much more their loved ones are here with them these days. Don, is fighting his prostate cancer 100% with natural treatments. That worked well. Not everything perfect but he is still managing that with natural treatments.
Another example on Pan Cancer. I am in contact with people with pn cancer. some choused to fully go for conventional with nothing additional. Nothing worked. Others decided to implement metabolic and supplements next to that. I called some weeks ago, and after more than half an year the only treatment they employed still works very well.
Because I interact with so many people and clinics, I can look at patterns here and I can say that: Metformin, Curcumin, and many others we discussed here can very much contribute to support conventional treatment options. I do not discuss those such as B17 here because that simply does not work based on all inputs I have from patients, clinics and own experience. I only discuss what has chances to work based on the information I have available.
So you see Johan, both you and J are right. Both metabolic and natural treatments can work. There is not just one answer.
Please always share when you agree or disagree with something.
Coming back to the clinics and others: we live in a world that is still fighting to each other. We still have wars around. That tells you where our society is now. That will be reflected in all sections of society, including conventional and alternative clinics. Some we can trust others not. I actually myself came across something disappointing in this area, during the past weeks. But let,s discuss here everything that we trust or we don't. We do not have to be diplomatic because we want to contribute to life. But we need to use facts and science.
I hope both you and J agree and I apologise if some of my statements were rough. Thank you in advance for your understanding and reply.
Kind regards,
Daniel
Hi D., I'm not trying to be right, and I'm not attacking the metabolic approach (although it would be nice to see more verified case reports of long term survival). But I was totally stunned when I read that "testimonial" (obviously not based on facts and science) knowing a mayor contributor on here is recommending that clinic to the brother of a cancer patient who's only been recently diagnosed. Sometimes it is just black or white. Or at least we should treat it that way. But I will not interfere in this thread any longer, and I don't think it was up to you to reply, I just asked @jcancom a few straightforward questions about his recommendations and statements.
Have a great day ?
@johan @Daniel
Daniel - johan!
It is always important to bring opinions and give our point of view! nobody has solid answers for this sad disease! A discussion is always constructive.
I also have my own opinion about many clinics and their interest in attracting desperate patients! the problem is for many people and their inability to implement therapies on their own. Without going into deep detail, it is very difficult to access metabolic treatments such as those discussed here without having major challenges. Physical, psychological and economic exhaustion is not within the reach of many people.
I am very clear that nothing would have been possible without your help and opinion on this blog ... hope is a very valuable weapon!
Hi D., I'm not trying to be right, and I'm not attacking the metabolic approach (although it would be nice to see more verified case reports of long term survival). But I was totally stunned when I read that "testimonial" (obviously not based on facts and science) knowing a mayor contributor on here is recommending that clinic to the brother of a cancer patient who's only been recently diagnosed. Sometimes it is just black or white. Or at least we should treat it that way. But I will not interfere in this thread any longer, and I don't think it was up to you to reply, I just asked @jcancom a few straightforward questions about his recommendations and statements.
Have a great day ?
Hi Johan,
What triggered my intervention was the way how you responded which was not Johan that I knew, next to the fact that you removed the links you had on your Blog to cancertreatmentsresearch. So I thought that there is something more. I am glad to know that was just a coincidence and there is nothing more. I am glad to have you here as it I do with J. But we have enough challenges in life so at least here we should do our best to have a balanced and constructive communication.
As you very well know, it would be nice to see more verified case reports on all approaches, metabolic or not. But will we ever have those? If we do not change anything in this society we will not have more. I am trying to do something about that and I hope we can unite our energy in that direction.
Regarding clinics, this should be a subject that we should discuss. It is of course a very challenging one. Some of these clinics are lead by some very goo doctors and naturophats while others are purely acting as simple businesses focused on maximising profits. We clearly need them as patients as long as the medical system is stuck into protocols that are set-up like factories. Without many of these cancer clinics there would be so much more pain in the world. Trust me. I speak from experience. Many of them did not even wanted to receive my wife when she was diagnosed and I did not know anything about cancer. I was so happy when a clinic accepted us and we could start to do something to slow down cancer. We went to one of the cheapest clinic (we could not afford expensive ones) and after 6 months of various treatments the 3-4 cm recurrence was gone. We were just diagnosed and the system could not do anything for it. Was a good decision to go immediately there? I think was one of the best we had that gave us time to learn more and be able to do more about it.
As I understand J was suggesting a clinic in the context in which the patient may be put on drug holiday, due to liver challenges?
In this case you can decide to watch and wait or do something about it. Each should decide what is best for him/her, considering all the input he/she can collect, starting with the oncologist.
Anyway Johan, I think debates are good as long as they are balanced. They have the potential to bring value to the surface. I hope you as well as J are appreciating debates and discussions and lets continue those. It could be a good idea to focus them on clinics. That may be valuable for those reading.
Btw, my dream is for some of us to create a team and go around the world and review clinics that are open for review. That should be so helpful. The challenge is to find the financial resources to do that so that the reviews will be unbiased and available to all.
Have a great day Johan 🙂
Kind regards,
Daniel
The problem I see is that when false information, like the claims that triggered this entire debate, is not acknowledged
for what it actually is, and even worse, defended or sugarcoated, than my opinion is that we'll all lose in the long run.
In Chile, there recently was a debate to start requiring a Rx to buy curcumin. The reason why is simple; misuse of health claims in the sale of this natural product. The more misuse in the marketing of health services and products, the more it'll become more tightly regulated. And you couldn't even blame governments for wanting to do so if you read some of the nonsense. We can reference in vitro, en vivo, or in silico studies, but "in utero"?? Imagine if we'd have to go to an MD just to get an rx for some curcumin? Many people can't even afford a visit.
The people at Dayspring could all be wonderful and well-meaning people, but the claims they make put so much at risk IMO.
I'd like to put the issue at rest, you do great work, and wish you all the best!
Oh, about the links, I removed the links to this forum for the reasons I've mentioned, and although my blog doesn't receive much visitors, I wouldn't want to send anyone who visits my blog to the bad advice (IMHO) in this particular thread. There are other links still in place. And I'll be linking from some of the specific blog pages, like EGCG to mcsformulas, but you're still updating your website and I'll get to it as soon as you're ready.
Cheers ? ?
@johan Johan, this is the right way to discuss. Also, if you believe that something doesn't help or is dangerous please also indicate to me and let's discuss it. Fortunately, we have no bias and no reason do defend one or another clinic. The only problem I have is time. But when you see something that is a big issue, I will give it the highest priority and discuss it, because I care. So can you please start a topic to address that specific point J made about a clinic. And together with you and J we can have a look at the clinic, discuss and conclude as much as we can. After that, we can add a link as a warning to the statement that triggered this analysis if that is required.
We can always work in this way and never make it personal, as its for the best of all of us.
Nobody is perfect. I am sure I also made mistakes, as well as you and J, when speaking about treatments. We are learning, as everybody does regardless if it is patient, caregiver, scientist or clinician.
I totally agree about overstatements about Curcumin and others. But you know that conventional solutions are also overstated. Not to speak about immuno therapy. This is the world we live in. I of course do not agree with it. I was just giving example the other day about this company stating on the front label 12.000mg Curcumin, suggesting that is in the capsule and was very disappointed about that as some patients are taking it thinking that is the case while the capsule contains 200mg ...
As a side note: the regulation changes are initiated not by overstatements but often by lobbyist from specific industries, based on the insights I now started to get from supplements manufacturers. Overstatements and health claims are simply punished by low.
Hi @dng050,
Thank you for the update. Think carefully. Ask the Turkish what are the metabolic treatments they would use. This is very important.
Regardless, 50.000 are a lot of money that gives you access to many treatment options, you need to use them carefully. Another idea to consider is the following combo:
1. Transarterial chemo embolisation to the lungs (that was about 4000 euro/session/month a few years ago)
2. Implement around that supportive treatments (metabolic or not, hyperthermia, etc.)
This could be a more financial sustainable way to move forward. In addition trans arterial chemo is done by some of the largest University Hospital in Germany, not a private clinic.
Just another idea.
Kind regards,
Daniel
Nobody is perfect. I am sure I also made mistakes, as well as you and J, when speaking about treatments. We are learning, as everybody does regardless if it is patient, caregiver, scientist or clinician.
Ofcourse, D.
Have a great evening, or it's probably night over there!
dng050, I am so happy for you. You have done careful, thoughtful planning and have selected some top choices. Too often people will forego a very good option because they feel that some magically ideal solution can be found if only they search enough. In the process they then become forced to eventually choose a not so good option.
I feel good that I have been able to steer you towards some choices that will give above average expected results. It has taken those on forum years to develop the understanding needed to recognize those treatments that will likely demonstrate efficacy. For a few years our suggestions were realistically not that helpful. However, over the last year or two we have started to see patients who have had notable responses to metabolic strategies. Metabolic medicine is powerful. We are obviously still vigorously debating these issues, yet we have been developing a common reference point related to this metabolic perspective. I will be very interested to hear what others might suggest as alternatives treatment choices.
Our forum has been co-evolving with clinics who are now providing the vision of treatment that we have been imagining. Instead of trying to read libraries of medical journals, visiting a clinic offers a much more convenient option. They will have clinical knowledge that might take us decades to discover. Getting to a clinic soon has to make a great deal of sense; waiting not so much. I do acknowledge that clinics might not be ideal, though in terms of the range of options available to you, they likely make the most sense at this time. Nonetheless, if I had the option to go live with D or Manuone for $10K a month for treatment, then I would be on the first plane. For me, having people who are 100% and 24/7 overrides all honorifics.
It is quite possible that you might eventually develop some level of buyer's remorse because the treatments might seem somewhat ineffectual: Vitamin C? Hyperthermia? They do not seem overly glamorous. Yet, the research has found that combined, they can be quite powerful. Remember that even at 10 grams per day IV, 8% of the monotherapy vitamin C patients from the original 1970s had fatal tumor lysis syndrome responses. Metabolic clinics are aware of a range of treatment intensifiers that can be combined to create response. From my current understanding, I would be surprised if a clinic were unable to produce a substantial response. Within conventional medicine, treatment is often constrained to a limited number of treatment options. Metabolics offers a very large selection of options.
However, with alternative medicine there are uncertainties: Commercial considerations are involved. Often there is a lack of formally published research and even when such research exists it can be unclear what assumptions might be assumed that are not in fact valid. I can understand D's and johan's skepticism. I appreciate that johan has stepped forward to champion your rights.You are in a vulnerable position and it is all too easy to be victimized. Nevertheless you are in this difficult circumstance and must cope the best that you can. Hopefully suggestions from the forum will be of help to you.
It is difficult to penetrate the fog of confusion through mere contemplation alone. However, some partial verification is possible. For example, Chemothermia claimed average survival of ~19 months for metastatic pancreatic cancer patients. Jess' dad who followed many of the treatment ideas from Chemothermia had roughly a similar survival. This is substantially greater than other typical patients.
Chemothermia has become a metabolic leader. Being outside of the stifling regulations of modern civilization is a great benefit. Turkey is the Mexico of Europe. We have seen how thought leaders in America had to leave to pursue their dreams of innovation. Ironically, the American team had to relocate to Germany to treat the first 3-BP patient.
A great deal of money is involved, more than I had realized, though what should be kept in mind is that it is really a set of installments of $10K. After each treatment cycle, you should regroup and evaluate performance. By actively participating in the thought process related to the financing, you will receive the best value for your treatment dollar. This is important as cancer can be both a medical and ultimately also a financial struggle. The first installment of $10K to learn about living an anti-cancer lifestyle within an immersive therapeutic oncology environment is reasonable value.
Chemothermia's lung cancer results wowed a great many people in the metabolic community when they were reported a few years ago. Realistically, patients with metastatic lung cancer will not typically survive for 3 or 4 years. This is self-evident. Chemothermia's historical lung cancer controls lived for ~8 months. It is remarkable that simply carboplatin etc. could be amplified metabolically to achieve such results.
Honestly, I had hoped that you could stay away from traditional chemo for as long as possible. Targeted therapy for a year or two (perhaps with metabolic support) had seemed to me the way forward. Traditional chemo with metabolic support would then be another line that could be available to you. However, you are closer to the situation and apparently now feel this is not possible. It would be advisable to at least ask if a ROS1 targeted treatment could be used in place of Chemothermia's chemo plan.
Starting onto the learning journey earlier than later is highly sensible. Most patients will never do anything until they are end stage. Chemothermia's survival curves show that once they can achieve stabilization many patients exhibit long term survival. Yet, during the first year or two many of their patients simply were medically non-viable. Given that you are early, this bodes well for an above average result. Cancer is such an enormously confusing illness to try and manage. If you want to try to do it yourself, there is so much research to try and understand: it is almost impossible.
Sorry to ramble, though I wanted to express a great many thoughts. Bottom line, if you can safely travel to Turkey to begin round 1 of treatment (~$10K), then I think this is a highly reasonable plan. I am not informed about the current treatment situation, though I assume that unfortunately targeted treatment is no longer considered an option and that your oncologist is unable to offer a treatment with the expected results of metabolically supported chemotherapy.
Dear Friends,
It's clear that we have reached a point where our views are different. I believe that having different opinions and debates is what bring value to the world.
As a moderator, I behave on this website with others as I would expect others to behave with me. I do not moderate opinions of others as long as they are expressed in a normal communication. I do not believe in keeping safe people by removing opinions but by debating opinions.
We have to realise that each expressed opinion is affected by needs, beliefs and character. Beliefs are affected by education and life experience. Those are clearly different for all of us and so our opinions in this case. Some of us had to deal with cancer and some not. Some of us are reading the science every day some not. Some of us have used the service of cancer clinics, some not. Some of us are more aggressive in addressing life challenges while others more reactive. And so on ...
My view is that when we deal with cancer we need to act, but we need to act carefully and informed. This is why I understand both J and Johan, as one expresses the need to act and another to be extremely careful.
As I suggested in my previous messages, if you find useful discussing cancer clinics, please open a topic and we can start discussing that. Otherwise let's move forward while having the disclaimer in mind that comes on each of my blog posts and applies to all the content and communications on this website :
https://www.cancertreatmentsresearch.com/home/disclaimer/
Please take time to read this one.
Kind regards,
Daniel
