head to head: Gerson vs chemo


jts

Recommended Posts

This video is supposed to be a head to head study of Gerson therapy vs chemo therapy. In this study chemo worked better than Gerson.

I emailed The Gerson Institute and this is part of the response I got:

"We contacted Dr. Greger and, even though he acknowledged this video wasn’t about the Gerson Therapy, he refused to remove it or change its title."

Beware of dishonesty in scientific research or in the presentation of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This video is supposed to be a head to head study of Gerson therapy vs chemo therapy. In this study chemo worked better than Gerson.

I emailed The Gerson Institute and this is part of the response I got:

"We contacted Dr. Greger and, even though he acknowledged this video wasn’t about the Gerson Therapy, he refused to remove it or change its title."

Beware of dishonesty in scientific research or in the presentation of it.

My, my. The labels look so authentic!

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This video is supposed to be a head to head study of Gerson therapy vs chemo therapy. In this study chemo worked better than Gerson.

I emailed The Gerson Institute and this is part of the response I got:

"We contacted Dr. Greger and, even though he acknowledged this video wasn’t about the Gerson Therapy, he refused to remove it or change its title."

Beware of dishonesty in scientific research or in the presentation of it.

My, my. The labels look so authentic!

Ba'al Chatzaf

No they don't. I don't recognize anything there that is used in Gerson therapy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No they don't. I don't recognize anything there that is used in Gerson therapy.

I didn't say there -were-authentic. I said they -looked- authentic.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No they don't. I don't recognize anything there that is used in Gerson therapy.

I didn't say there -were-authentic. I said they -looked- authentic.

Ba'al Chatzaf

The Gerson diet includes orange juice, green juice, carrot juice, carrot apple juice, some solid food, some supplements. I don't see any of those things in the picture. They neither were nor looked authentic. The Gerson Institute says what they tested was not Gerson therapy. The study was bullshit. But it probably passed peer review anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No they don't. I don't recognize anything there that is used in Gerson therapy.

I didn't say there -were-authentic. I said they -looked- authentic.

Ba'al Chatzaf

They seem authentic. The labels that can be seen are cancer drugs.

As far as the study glimpsed in the video, the whole thing is here: "Pancreatic proteolytic enzyme therapy compared with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy for the treatment of pancreatic cancer." (the video has a prequel here which focuses on Gerson therapy).

The enzyme therapy regimen the study tested against standard therapy is closest to the Gonzalez therapy, which grew from the Kelly treatment. Both share with Gerson therapy some important principles and techniques. A potted history of the therapy is given in the text of the study and at Quackwatch. As with Gerson therapy there are enemas. There are a lot of pills (supplements). There are porcine pancreatic enzymes ... here is a brief description from Quackwatch.

Gonzalez's cancer treatment resembles Kelley's with some exceptions. Gonzalez dispensed with the neurological and spiritual components. He uses hair analysis instead of a questionnaire to monitor progress. As with Kelley, Gonzalez insists that a cancer can be eliminated "by the patient's own body" if the liver, intestines, kidneys, lungs, and blood are detoxified and the body's acid/alkaline balance as well as its mineral and enzyme equilibria are brought into balance. To accomplish this, Gonzalez treats with coffee enemas and supplements of megavitamins, trace minerals, glandular extracts, and diet .

Coffee enemas. According to Gonzalez, tumors are collections of abnormal cells, so when therapy causes cell breakdown (necrosis), abnormal molecules of tumor waste are released into the blood. They are filtered and detoxified by the liver. They are excreted through the bile ducts from the liver to the small intestine. The walls of the bile ducts are composed of smooth muscle that caffeine in coffee causes to relax, allowing ducts to "open wide," allowing tumor toxins to pass into the small bowel.

Supplements. Patients may take as many as 150 pills per day of the above supplements in order to replace the nutrients lost during detoxification.

Diet. The patient submits samples of scalp hair for analysis performed by a company in Louisiana. From hair analysis Gonzalez determines the patients' "nutritional, mineral, and biochemical patterns and clinical status." A "hair analysis CT test score" determines the specifics of the diet. Diets consist of "all-natural poison-free food" to prevent new tissue intoxication and to reestablish the body's balance.

Gonzalez himself has had a lot to say about the Journal of Oncoology study being unfair and wrong to his therapy in various venues -- including a book "What went wrong?" -- but it is pretty straightforward comparison. Gonzalez hasn't fared well in the science-based medicine forums: see Orac for a tough treatment.

There is also a sober and wide-ranging presentation of the Gonzalez therapy from the National Cancer Institute.

-- Jerry remains to be convinced of any effectiveness whatsoever for 'poisons' like gemcitabine, so it's hard to see what might convince him that Gonzalez/Gerson/Kelly treatments are not the best bet.

The saddest part of the Gonzalez therapy, as with every other questionable therapy, is the folks who don't experience the miraculous turnarounds (or survival rates). Death from pancreatic cancer is already grim.

Finally, the New Yorker did a piece on Gonzalez, "The Outlaw Doctor":

"There is really only one truth," Gonzalez told me. "Either cancer patients get better with my treatment or they do not. And, if they do, I could not care less whether it involved moon dust or microbes from Pluto. What matters is that many–not all, by any means–of my patients are alive when they should be dead. And what has that made me in the eyes of the traditional cancer establishment? Simple. I am Gonzalez, the quack, the fraud, the doctor who lies to cancer patients, steals their money, and kills them. If there was a signup sheet at N.I.H. to run me down with a truck, people would stand on line for hours."
Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No they don't. I don't recognize anything there that is used in Gerson therapy.

I didn't say there -were-authentic. I said they -looked- authentic.

Ba'al Chatzaf

The Gerson diet includes orange juice, green juice, carrot juice, carrot apple juice, some solid food, some supplements.

This is an outrage. It's heresy. It's blasphemy. It's an atrocity... and I am personally offended.

Just who in the hell needs orange, green, carrot, or apple juice...

...when there's perfectly good Cytoxan, Adriamycyne, dacarbazine, Vepesid. and bleomicide sulphate.

(jeez... stupid freaking idiots)

Greg :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jerry gave us a peek at what he calls the Gerson diet, saying it "includes" orange juice, green juice, carrot juice, some solid food, some supplements ...

I note that Jerry's list is not all complete and tends to deprecate that the 'diet' is not taken apart from the therapy. The Gerson Institute says "The Gerson Therapy is an extremely complex and comprehensive treatment,' even requiring a particular kind of juicer. Indeed juices are the primary component of the diet. Jerry says, "some solid food" is part of the diet part of the therapy, but this leaves out a lot of detail. Some supplements indeed. Instead of a 'diet,' think of a determined regimen.

Greg gets a bit hot on mention of good old wholesome juices.

Just who in the hell needs orange, green, carrot, or apple juice...

...when there's perfectly good Cytoxan, Adriamycyne, dacarbazine, Vepesid. and bleomicide sulphate.

(jeez... stupid freaking idiots)

I eat a lot of fruit and vegetables, but rarely if ever juice. I like the crunch. The same ingredients go to the same place as with the juice component of the Gerson regimen, so I see no big deal. I don't know who needs, really needs, quart jug after quart jug of Gerson. (in any case, nothing prohibits a cancer patient taking in fruits and vegetables by juice or otherwise)

Here's what they say:

The Gerson Therapy regenerates the body to health, supporting each important metabolic requirement by flooding the body with nutrients from about 15- 20 pounds of organically grown fruits and vegetables daily. Most is used to make fresh raw juice,

So, a position dead-set against inflated claims for Gerson miracles in no way obviates nutrition. A position that argues for best-care in cancer treatment similarly in no way argues against nutrition -- for the benefit of the organism. Nor does it obviate against scientific research into nutrition and cancer. Indeed, the organization that provided the video Jerry posted has some fascinating and abundant research on foods that gives insight into how and why vegetables and fruits and other foods and phyto-chemicals can be protective against cancer (and also explains research that explains why some foods are contra-indicated).

The chemical names Greg mentions above are mostly powerful and dangerous prescription anti-cancer agents.

-- I don't know who the freaking idiots are, stupid things, but am still inclined to be skeptical of miracles attributed to Gerson therapies.

Greg, besides the bit of solids food and the hundreds of capsules of supplements, you should know that Gerson therapy also demands anal-cleansing or rectal irrigation at least twice a day -- with coffee.

There is also a lengthy compendium of things forbidden to be ingested. Included on the blacklist are such things as all fats, all animal proteins, high-protein foods, protein, all dairy, raw spinach, mushrooms, and about a hundred other things.

Each of the classes of items on the forbidden list has a few rationales, but not all. If you wonder why spinach is bad, no clue. If you wonder why you should not drink water, or take coffee but by colon:

Drinking water
Contrary to the commonly heard recommendation to “drink 8 glasses of water a day”, Gerson strongly
believed that a Gerson patient should not drink water, so as to avoid diluting the stomach acid, and to allow
maximum capacity for nutrition from fresh foods and juices. If the patient is taking less than 13 juices, he/she may
need to augment with tea or other fluid.
...
Coffee and Coffee Substitutes by Mouth
Coffee and coffee substitutes by mouth, both with and without caffeine. Taken by mouth, coffee effects
undesirable stimulation of the digestive system, and the caffeine acts as an undesirable stimulant to the central
nervous system. Coffee is also virtually devoid of nutrients. However, when taken rectally, it has an entirely
different, and desirable effect on the body.

You can't make this stuff up. I don't believe the rationale or the need for the proscriptions. I believe listening to the science better informs us why we should eat our fruits and vegetables, that we don't really need Gerson concepts to rule our diets or life (or reaction to cancer diagnosis). I know this differs from Jerry's beliefs. I don't know if Greg disagrees with it, despite his brief comments.

Below is a video I found fascinating at the Nutrition Facts website, Xenohormesis, or What doesn't kill plants makes us stronger. Cool, rational, intriguing stuff. There is more at the site I can recommend, as the guy -- Michael Greger, MD -- is a clever and practiced speaker. Here's a link to a great presentation on 'Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death,' and a bit of the transcript.

For those of you unfamiliar with my work, every year I read through every issue of every English-language nutrition journal in the world—so you don’t have to. Every year my presentations are brand-new because every year the science is brand-new.

I then take all the most interesting, groundbreaking, practical findings and create videos I upload to my website NutritionFacts.org.

Everything on the website is free. There's no ads, no corporate sponsorship, It's strictly noncommercial; I'm not selling anything. I just put it up as a public service. New videos every other day on the latest in nutrition.

Now if you've seen any of my past year's presentations, you know that over the years I've addressed the most pressing dietary issues of our time, like What's the healthiest variety of apple, the most nutritious nut, the best bean, the best berry, the best bowel movement!...

Who's #1 at #2? well, it wasn't the new Yorkers—the most constipated population ever described in the medical literature, outputting an average of just 3 measly ounces a day….

Maybe if they'd just eat a big apple once and awhile…

But this year, I thought I'd lighten it up, and answer. What's-the-best…… way-to-prevent, death. Every year the CDC updates the leading causes of death in the United States. So, let's just start at the top, and touch on what's new in each category.

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gerson therapy is not for healthy people. It is for only sick people. I thought this was understood.

From: http://gerson.org/gerpress/faqs-general/

--- quote ---

Q: I am not sick myself, but I am interested in the principles of the Gerson Therapy for preventative health. Can I still follow the Gerson Therapy if I am not ill?

A: Preventative health is not our area of expertise, as our organization is solely devoted to education about the Gerson Therapy. The Gerson Therapy was specifically developed as a treatment for cancer and other chronic degenerative diseases. Following the full Gerson Therapy is not necessary or advisable for someone who is simply seeking to enhance their overall health. The diet could be too limited for someone using it strictly for prevention.

However, there are components of the Gerson Therapy that, when used judiciously, could be beneficial to anyone, sick or well. For example, juicing, eating an entirely organic diet, and using detoxification methods such as coffee enemas can certainly be used to maintain a healthy lifestyle.

---end quote ---

Spinach: I thought this would be obvious. Oxalic acid.

Celery: Too much sodium.

Nuts: Too much fat for one thing.

The forbidden foods are mostly for sick people, not healthy people. I thought this was understood.

Listen to Charlotte Gerson's lengthy lectures and most of it will be explained.

The reason for the juice: Not needed if you are healthy. If you are sick, the idea is to overdose on nutrition. Without juicing, how would you have the time and the stomach capacity to eat 20 pounds of veggies per day and the physiological energy to digest it (when you are sick)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Gerson diet includes orange juice, green juice, carrot juice, carrot apple juice, some solid food, some supplements. I don't see any of those things in the picture. They neither were nor looked authentic. The Gerson Institute says what they tested was not Gerson therapy. The study was bullshit. But it probably passed peer review anyway.

Okay, now we have established that the Gerson therapy is a protracted, expensive regimen for sick people, this sets aside Greg's spluttering. We also set aside that Gerson therapy was being compared with conventional -- that was a particular cancer with the Gonzalez regimen.

Now, you say the study was, er, bullshit, anyway. Care to back that up in any way? Care to highlight the similarities and differences between Gerson and Gonzalez for the shut-ins, or are we all past that?

You have cited one 1995 article in an alternative medicine journal, Alternative Therapies In Health and Medicine, in favour of Gerson. Some folks at University of Texas Cancer Center took a close look at this. Their review is found here, and is recommended for its scope. There is lots of literature besides that which mentions or cites that one article. Here's a Google Scholar page that returns articles that reference the Gerson review you cited. Dialogue!

I won't harry you on this, Jerry. If you think that the Gerson therapy delivers miraculous cures, I'll just say that this is not well-supported by the kind of evidence that convinces me. I do sometimes wonder how you figure questionable therapies will survive a good OL inspection, and how you breeze past evidence that counters your concepts. But it's not like you are MD for the suffering at OL, and I don't think Gerson is the first person OLers will think about should a tumour take root in their bodies, so no harm no foul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Gerson diet includes orange juice, green juice, carrot juice, carrot apple juice, some solid food, some supplements. I don't see any of those things in the picture. They neither were nor looked authentic. The Gerson Institute says what they tested was not Gerson therapy. The study was bullshit. But it probably passed peer review anyway.

Okay, now we have established that the Gerson therapy is a protracted, expensive regimen for sick people, this sets aside Greg's spluttering. We also set aside that Gerson therapy was being compared with conventional -- that was a particular cancer with the Gonzalez regimen.

Now, you say the study was, er, bullshit, anyway. Care to back that up in any way? Care to highlight the similarities and differences between Gerson and Gonzalez for the shut-ins, or are we all past that?

You have cited one 1995 article in an alternative medicine journal, Alternative Therapies In Health and Medicine, in favour of Gerson. Some folks at University of Texas Cancer Center took a close look at this. Their review is found here, and is recommended for its scope. There is lots of literature besides that which mentions or cites that one article. Here's a Google Scholar page that returns articles that reference the Gerson review you cited. Dialogue!

I won't harry you on this, Jerry. If you think that the Gerson therapy delivers miraculous cures, I'll just say that this is not well-supported by the kind of evidence that convinces me. I do sometimes wonder how you figure questionable therapies will survive a good OL inspection, and how you breeze past evidence that counters your concepts. But it's not like you are MD for the suffering at OL, and I don't think Gerson is the first person OLers will think about should a tumour take root in their bodies, so no harm no foul.

About Gerson therapy is protracted and expensive and for sick people:

Protracted. Real health is built, not bought. It is a process that takes time. But maybe sometimes not so much time. Charlotte Gerson said that type 2 diabetes can be reversed in 5-8 days, not weeks but days. For cancer it takes at least 2 years for a full recovery even if the tumor is gone long before that.

Expensive. Do you know how expensive chemotherapy is? Do you know any cheap cancer treatment? What price health? But I suspect that the price of Gerson therapy if you do it on your own is greatly exaggerated.

About the study was bullshit:

I already answered this. I got email from the Gerson Institute. Part of it was:

"We contacted Dr. Greger and, even though he acknowledged this video wasn’t about the Gerson Therapy, he refused to remove it or change its title."

It was presented as Gerson but was not Gerson. That means it was bullshit. Furthermore, Dr. Gregor's honesty is in doubt in all his videos.

About the review:

http://www.healthofamericans.org/files/Gerson_s_Therapy_Review_By_MD_Anderson_Cancer_Center.pdf

That is about the 50 cases and has nothing to do with the 1995 study. If you want to cite a review of the 1995 study, make sure it is about the 1995 study.

About the Google page that you cite:

http://scholar.google.ca/scholar?es_sm=122&um=1&ie=UTF-8&lr=&cites=2492506472422719892

What is your point? What am I supposed to do with all that?

About miracles:

I don't believe in miracles. Nutrition is not a miracle, even tho sometimes it might look like a miracle to people who don't believe in nutrition. Nutrition is a process that can be studied scientifically. It has nothing to do with divine intervention. If a cancer patient reversed cancer without nutrition and without removing crud, that would be a miracle. Nope, I don't believe in miracles. You said Gerson therapy is protracted. Miracles usually are instant, not protracted.

About evidence:

I am well aware that Gerson therapy or other variations on the theme of nutrition are not well supported by the kind of evidence that most people require. I would be surprised if it was. Why would a medical journal that gets 70% of its revenue from advertising drugs publish an article that would reduce sales of drugs? Why would a medical journal publish an article that bashes medicine?

My idea of evidence:

Someone has a disease (cancer, diabetes, whatever), then recovers (no longer has the disease). If the facts are above board, then this is at least evidence that it was possible at least in this instance to beat the disease. That is a start. With more success stories, maybe a pattern will emerge.

So far the most impressive success stories seem to be based on nutrition. Sometimes on fasting. Fasting works well on diseases of excess (Dr. Alan Goldhamer), but are disasterous on diseases of deficiency (Dr. Patrick Vickers). I see more and better success stories based on nutrition than on fasting.

How I judge doctors:

What is their success rate? Do their patients get well? If not then the doctor is no good. The doctors who are the best at getting their patients well are mostly into nutrition and lifestyle. The other doctors are mostly into drugs and symptoms management.

Quality computer voice reading an article by Patrick Vickers about the politics and profits of cancer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two clear antithetical approaches to disease expressed here:

1. The narcoculture approach.

2. The natural approach.

The establishment narcoculture approach is a top down scorched earth chemical and radiation holocaust.

The alternative natural approach is bottom up benign food and exercise.

One approach compensates for behavior...

...while the other changes behavior.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two clear antithetical approaches to disease expressed here:

1. The narcoculture approach.

2. The natural approach.

The establishment narcoculture approach is a top down scorched earth chemical and radiation holocaust.

The alternative natural approach is bottom up benign food and exercise.

One approach compensates for behavior...

...while the other changes behavior.

Greg

And?*

*Not sure what you're ultimately driving at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two clear antithetical approaches to disease expressed here:

1. The narcoculture approach.

2. The natural approach.

The establishment narcoculture approach is a top down scorched earth chemical and radiation holocaust.

The alternative natural approach is bottom up benign food and exercise.

One approach compensates for behavior...

...while the other changes behavior.

Greg

And?*

*Not sure what you're ultimately driving at.

Just describing the two approaches to disease to show how much they contrast.

Each individual is free to choose and gets the consequences of their own choice.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oxalic acid are you serious? Rhubarb leaves have oxalic acid in them. Great way to shut down your kidneys and die...

In Gerson therapy, some foods that probably would be good for healthy people are forbidden. For example berries, spinach, cucumbers juiced, celery. And one might wonder why these foods are forbidden. In the case of spinach it's oxalic acid. In the case of celery it's too much sodium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oxalic acid are you serious? Rhubarb leaves have oxalic acid in them. Great way to shut down your kidneys and die...

In Gerson therapy, some foods that probably would be good for healthy people are forbidden. For example berries, spinach, cucumbers juiced, celery. And one might wonder why these foods are forbidden. In the case of spinach it's oxalic acid. In the case of celery it's too much sodium.

I'm strong at the finish 'cause I eats my spinach. Toot Toot.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm strong at the finish 'cause I eats my spinach. Toot Toot.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Testimonials are ka ka.

So is Popeye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now