Talk Cancer » Cancer Institute

Chemo & Hormone Therapy

admin — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

National Cancer Institute – Clinical Trials: (Sorry – You’ll have to copy and paste) http://www.cancer.gov/Templates/doc.aspx?viewid=CF77634E-36E7-47C2-A8… -Gordy

Response:

I guess you won’t have to copy and paste, after all. -Gordy

Response:

On March 17, Steve Kramer responded to WSF: I have heard over the years and in reading Walsh, Strum and Scardino that this was coming. Decades ago, chemo was used on PCa without benefit and with terrible SEs. But new stuff, including Taxotere, is much, much better. One, I don’t recall which doc, likened it to using a shotgun years ago and using a sniper rifle now. Furthermore, Taxotere has been successful in allowing the afflicted another 4-6 months on average. They speculate, however, that earlier use of it might extend that time out to… well, who knows?

It would be helpful, when considering the docetaxel (Taxotere) clinical trials upon which FDA approval was founded, to consider the nature of the cohort of men who were the subjects of the trials. In essence, they were, as my med onc puts it, men who were on their last legs, who had no hope. In short, men who, knowing their conditions, volunteered to be lab rats in the hope of helping others. Such as, for instance, thee and me. They, unnamed heroes all, should be remembered with honor. And the point is that the few months that they achieved, remarkable considering their clinical states, means for those of us who have not reached that point that the results of Taxotere tx can be expected to be far better than those of the lab rats. Regards, Steve J "Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." — Ralph Waldo Emerson

Response:

Another question. If I start hormone therapy now, am I just giving my pC that may still be in my body, the jump on refractory resistance to the hormones? Only to find out that I’ve sort of ‘dared’ my pC into recurrence. I think Shakespeare put it best, ‘To be or not to be’ WhiteSoxFan

Response:

Pardon my laziness, but I’d rather just ask you than research your posts for the answer: Have you researched ADT’s benefits and SEs thoroughly, including Strum’s ADT Syndrome paper and the condensed summaries of that and much more that I’ve posted a couple of times? I think adjuvant ADT is a far tougher decision than primary surgery vs radiation. I.P.

Response:

It depends, I would think, on the purpose. If you are trying to kill it just cuz it’s there, you will not succeed 100%. You will make most cells go dormant, but no more. However, if you’re thinking crush the bastards under your feet and then bring in the death knell with radiation or chemo, I’d say it might work. No one knows if it will work, but it might. — Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05, 5/05, 10/05, 2/06 PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 Non Illegitimi Carborundum

Response:

National Cancer Institute – Clinical Trials: (Sorry – You’ll have to copy and paste) http://www.cancer.gov/Templates/doc.aspx?viewid=CF77634E-36E7-47C2-A8… -Gordy

Gordy’s URL is clickable, but an easy-to-use alternative for posting very lengthy URLs (which often "break" when posted online) is http://tinyurl.com/. Alex

Response:

Hello, … In the mean time can you recommend questions to ask? Have any of you undergone this combination of therapy? What were the side effects? What were the benefits? …

One question to ask is for the URL (the web address) of the study documentation. There will be a record in the National Cancer Institute database that should give you an abstract of the study, the eligibility criteria, details of the treatment, who is conducting it, etc. If there is a "Health Professional" version that’s different from the "Patient" version, read that too. … I loathe the idea of perpitrating the medical/pharmacological industrial complex which my cynical self sees as the driving force behind all these studys. …

The documents will also tell you who the "Lead Organization/Sponsors" are. If it’s being conducted by a drug company, it should say so. If it’s sponsored by the National Cancer Institute or one of the Universities, that may alleviate some of your concerns. … And yet, without it our life expectancy wouldn’t have reached its current level and there are some altruistic researchers out there. …

I agree. I believe that most of the doctors and scientists really do this kind of work because they believe in it. The ones who are just in it for the money are out running private clinics. They aren’t working for universities or large clinics and hospitals. But of course there are cynics and exploiters in every profession. … I don’t like the idea of sitting on my hands so to speak waiting for that possible inevitable day when the blood test comes back with some velocity while I sort of like the holistic steps I’m taking by a low fat/ high soy diet, selenium supps, fish oil supps, turmuric supps, visualizing the pulverization of the micro fiber pC, in my body, both refractory and independant…and on and on and on. …

Considering just your own future and not the future of everyone else, there is still some benefit to being in the trial. I imagine it increases your odds of a relapse free future – though of course no one knows that for sure or else there wouldn’t be a clinical trial. So there are no guarantees. Being in a trial also means you’ll likely get good follow up care. As to side effects, I think the important things are: 1. Learn what side effects to expect. The doctors do NOT always know. To find out, get copies of the drug labels for each drug you will get and read them. Copies should be available on the web if the doctors can’t find them for you. 2. If you experience a side effect, recognize it early (which you can do because you read the label) and discuss it with the doctors early, hopefully before it becomes a severe problem. The effects may be manageable and, if not, you may be able to drop out of the trial before they get severe. Good luck. Alan

Response:

I have heard over the years and in reading Walsh, Strum and Scardino that this was coming. Decades ago, chemo was used on PCa without benefit and with terrible SEs. But new stuff, including Taxotere, is much, much better. One, I don’t recall which doc, likened it to using a shotgun years ago and using a sniper rifle now. Furthermore, Taxotere has been successful in allowing the afflicted another 4-6 months on average. They speculate, however, that earlier use of it might extend that time out to… well, who knows? — Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins PSA .1 .1 .1 .27 .37 .75 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05, 5/05, 10/05, 2/06 PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 Non Illegitimi Carborundum

Response:

I have also been asked to sign up for a similar trial that consist of 16 weeks of weekly injection of Doxorubicin and Taxotere,to be followed by 12 months of HT treatment. This would be a Phase II trial. I have recurring after EXBRT. I am also sort of apprehensive about signing up,but, what else is there? cryo,hifu? bob

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello, I’ve been asked to partake in a clinical trial that is testing to see if Chemotherapy combined with Hormone Therapy immediately after an RRP in high risk patients (my Gleason was an helps to stave off pC recurrence longer than those without the prophylactic treatment. I guess my first post op PSA test of <.1 also fits the parameters of the trial to see if this helps to stave off the Mets. I talk to the Onc next week regarding the trial so this is all the info I have so far. I’ll certainly keep you all informed. In the mean time can you recommend questions to ask? Have any of you undergone this combination of therapy? What were the side effects? What were the benefits? I’ve done some lengthy Googling ("Chemotherapy and hormone therapy" prostate) on it so I have seen a few articles. I am conflicted about this because on the one hand it seems like a good idea on the other hand the side effects are troubling. I loathe the idea of perpitrating the medical/pharmacological industrial complex which my cynical self sees as the driving force behind all these studys. And yet, without it our life expectancy wouldn’t have reached its current level and there are some altruistic researchers out there. I don’t like the idea of sitting on my hands so to speak waiting for that possible inevitable day when the blood test comes back with some velocity while I sort of like the holistic steps I’m taking by a low fat/ high soy diet, selenium supps, fish oil supps, turmuric supps, visualizing the pulverization of the micro fiber pC, in my body, both refractory and independant…and on and on and on. I know, welcome to pC life. Ok I’ll stop here. Thanks y’all, WhiteSoxFan Biopsy on 12/8/05 G8&7 T1c RRP on 1/26/06 G8 T2cNOMO Pos margins PSA <0.1 on 3/1/06

Response:

Hello, I’ve been asked to partake in a clinical trial that is testing to see if Chemotherapy combined with Hormone Therapy immediately after an RRP in high risk patients (my Gleason was an helps to stave off pC recurrence longer than those without the prophylactic treatment. I guess my first post op PSA test of <.1 also fits the parameters of the trial to see if this helps to stave off the Mets. I talk to the Onc next week regarding the trial so this is all the info I have so far. I’ll certainly keep you all informed. In the mean time can you recommend questions to ask? Have any of you undergone this combination of therapy? What were the side effects? What were the benefits? I’ve done some lengthy Googling ("Chemotherapy and hormone therapy" prostate) on it so I have seen a few articles. I am conflicted about this because on the one hand it seems like a good idea on the other hand the side effects are troubling. I loathe the idea of perpitrating the medical/pharmacological industrial complex which my cynical self sees as the driving force behind all these studys. And yet, without it our life expectancy wouldn’t have reached its current level and there are some altruistic researchers out there. I don’t like the idea of sitting on my hands so to speak waiting for that possible inevitable day when the blood test comes back with some velocity while I sort of like the holistic steps I’m taking by a low fat/ high soy diet, selenium supps, fish oil supps, turmuric supps, visualizing the pulverization of the micro fiber pC, in my body, both refractory and independant…and on and on and on. I know, welcome to pC life. Ok I’ll stop here. Thanks y’all, WhiteSoxFan Biopsy on 12/8/05 G8&7 T1c RRP on 1/26/06 G8 T2cNOMO Pos margins PSA <0.1 on 3/1/06

Response:

I'll still make it to the gym today….

admin — Sun, 24 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

"…The shallowest people end up blissfully happy and they are so vapid they don’t even realize how vapid they are because vapidity is the only trait that comes with its own impermeable obliviousness system…." ;-) Living Longer Is the Best Revenge By DAVID BROOKS Published: April 24, 2005 The release of a report in The Journal of the American Medical Association indicating that overweight people actually live longer than normal-weight people represents an important moment in the history of world civilization. It is the moment when we realize that Mother Nature – unlike Ivy League admissions committees – doesn’t like suck-ups. It turns out she doesn’t like those body-worshiping, multi-abbed marvels who’ve spent so much time at the bench press machine they look as if they have thighs growing out of either side of their necks. She doesn’t like those health-conscious rice cake addicts you see at Manhattan restaurants ordering a skinned olive for lunch and sitting there looking trim and fit in their tapered blouses while their buns of steel leave permanent dents in the upholstery. Mother Nature, we now know, is a saucy wench, who likes to play cosmic tricks on humanity. If the report from researchers at the National Cancer Institute and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is correct – and it is the most thorough done to date – then it seems that Mother Nature has built a little Laffer curve into the fabric of reality: health-conscious people can hit a point of negative returns, so the more fit they are, the quicker they kick the bucket. People who work out, eat responsibly and deserve to live are more likely to be culled by the Thin Reaper. I can’t tell you how happy this makes me. Since I read about this report a few days ago, I haven’t been able to stop grinning. I’ve been happy because as a member of the community of low-center-of-gravity Americans, I find that a lifetime of irresponsible behavior has been unjustly rewarded. If this study is correct, I’ll be ordering second helpings on into my 90’s while all those salad-munching health nuts who have been feeling so superior in their spandex pants and cutoff T-shirts will be dying of midriff pneumonia and other condescension-related diseases. I’ve been happy because now there will inevitably be a shift in the fashion winds, favoring members of the Zaftig Corps. Sports enjoyed by people with Rubenesque proportions, like floating, will come into vogue. More people will appreciate the thigh-rubbing musical rhythms you hear when overweight people wear corduroys. More people will realize we should all be patterning our lifestyle decisions on those made by Christopher Hitchens. Mostly, I’m happy on an existential level. I like to be reminded that the universe is basically crooked. This is what the zero-tolerance brigades and all the better living gurus never quite get. They’re busy trying to mold everybody into lifelong valedictorians, who spend their adulthood as carb counters and responsible flossers – the sort of organized folk who actually read legal documents before they sign them. In reality, life is perverse and human beings don’t get what they deserve. The people with the worst grades start the most successful businesses. The shallowest people end up blissfully happy and they are so vapid they don’t even realize how vapid they are because vapidity is the only trait that comes with its own impermeable obliviousness system. The people regarded as lightweights, like F.D.R., J.F.K. and Ronald Reagan, make the best presidents, while you – so much more thoughtful and better read – would be a complete disaster. Life isn’t fair, logic is of limited value and, as Woody Allen observed years ago, everything your parents once thought was good for you turns out to be bad for you: sun, milk, red meat and college. The chief moral lesson I take away from this report is that Mother Nature is happy to tolerate marginally irresponsible misbehavior. She doesn’t want you to go completely to seed. If you’re truly obese and arouse hippos when you visit the zoo, you could still punch your ticket at any moment. But she does want you to eat the occasional Cinnabon, so long as it isn’t bigger than Delaware. She wants you to have that fourth glass of wine, and lecture the dinner table on the future of the papacy based on your extensive reading of "The Da Vinci Code." She wants a little socially productive mediocrity. Darwin was wrong when he talked about the survival of the fittest: it’s really the survival of the healthy enough to get by. As it says in the Good Book, the last shall sometimes be first, the meek shall inherit the earth, and the chubby will get extra biscuits at the breakfast buffet.

Response:

Just don’t mouth off to anyone tougher than you and you should be fine.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "…The shallowest people end up blissfully happy and they are so vapid they don’t even realize how vapid they are because vapidity is the only trait that comes with its own impermeable obliviousness system…." ;-) Living Longer Is the Best Revenge By DAVID BROOKS Published: April 24, 2005 The release of a report in The Journal of the American Medical Association indicating that overweight people actually live longer than normal-weight people represents an important moment in the history of world civilization. It is the moment when we realize that Mother Nature – unlike Ivy League admissions committees – doesn’t like suck-ups. It turns out she doesn’t like those body-worshiping, multi-abbed marvels who’ve spent so much time at the bench press machine they look as if they have thighs growing out of either side of their necks. She doesn’t like those health-conscious rice cake addicts you see at Manhattan restaurants ordering a skinned olive for lunch and sitting there looking trim and fit in their tapered blouses while their buns of steel leave permanent dents in the upholstery. Mother Nature, we now know, is a saucy wench, who likes to play cosmic tricks on humanity. If the report from researchers at the National Cancer Institute and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is correct – and it is the most thorough done to date – then it seems that Mother Nature has built a little Laffer curve into the fabric of reality: health-conscious people can hit a point of negative returns, so the more fit they are, the quicker they kick the bucket. People who work out, eat responsibly and deserve to live are more likely to be culled by the Thin Reaper. I can’t tell you how happy this makes me. Since I read about this report a few days ago, I haven’t been able to stop grinning. I’ve been happy because as a member of the community of low-center-of-gravity Americans, I find that a lifetime of irresponsible behavior has been unjustly rewarded. If this study is correct, I’ll be ordering second helpings on into my 90’s while all those salad-munching health nuts who have been feeling so superior in their spandex pants and cutoff T-shirts will be dying of midriff pneumonia and other condescension-related diseases. I’ve been happy because now there will inevitably be a shift in the fashion winds, favoring members of the Zaftig Corps. Sports enjoyed by people with Rubenesque proportions, like floating, will come into vogue. More people will appreciate the thigh-rubbing musical rhythms you hear when overweight people wear corduroys. More people will realize we should all be patterning our lifestyle decisions on those made by Christopher Hitchens. Mostly, I’m happy on an existential level. I like to be reminded that the universe is basically crooked. This is what the zero-tolerance brigades and all the better living gurus never quite get. They’re busy trying to mold everybody into lifelong valedictorians, who spend their adulthood as carb counters and responsible flossers – the sort of organized folk who actually read legal documents before they sign them. In reality, life is perverse and human beings don’t get what they deserve. The people with the worst grades start the most successful businesses. The shallowest people end up blissfully happy and they are so vapid they don’t even realize how vapid they are because vapidity is the only trait that comes with its own impermeable obliviousness system. The people regarded as lightweights, like F.D.R., J.F.K. and Ronald Reagan, make the best presidents, while you – so much more thoughtful and better read – would be a complete disaster. Life isn’t fair, logic is of limited value and, as Woody Allen observed years ago, everything your parents once thought was good for you turns out to be bad for you: sun, milk, red meat and college. The chief moral lesson I take away from this report is that Mother Nature is happy to tolerate marginally irresponsible misbehavior. She doesn’t want you to go completely to seed. If you’re truly obese and arouse hippos when you visit the zoo, you could still punch your ticket at any moment. But she does want you to eat the occasional Cinnabon, so long as it isn’t bigger than Delaware. She wants you to have that fourth glass of wine, and lecture the dinner table on the future of the papacy based on your extensive reading of "The Da Vinci Code." She wants a little socially productive mediocrity. Darwin was wrong when he talked about the survival of the fittest: it’s really the survival of the healthy enough to get by. As it says in the Good Book, the last shall sometimes be first, the meek shall inherit the earth, and the chubby will get extra biscuits at the breakfast buffet.

Response:

Define "tough", bitch – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just don’t mouth off to anyone tougher than you and you should be fine. "…The shallowest people end up blissfully happy and they are so vapid they don’t even realize how vapid they are because vapidity is the only trait that comes with its own impermeable obliviousness system…." ;-)

Response:

Safety of Celebrex and Naproxen Questioned

admin — Tue, 21 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Bear, I’m with you. Celebrex let’s me get out of bed in the morning without crawling out of bed, and it controls the arthritis in my hands so I can keep working. From all the research I’m finding, I don’t really think they’ll pull it. The one trial where the problem was found, was using significantly higher dosages than area approved and used currently. What really gets me is some of the interviews I’ve been seeing with doctors who are saying there are lots of other meds that will do as well as Celebrex. Well, let them walk in our shoes for awhile, THEN say that. I’ve tried SO many other meds, and NO, none of them did anything for me. Teri

| I sure hope Celebrex doesn’t get pulled,, it makes it possible for me | to walk without my cane some days. It doesn’t do much for head pain,, | but really helps joint pain for me. | | Bear | | |

Response:

but I do take a lot of Naproxen during my cycle as a preventative though

I wouldn’t worry about it too much. The drug has been on the market for something like 29 (?) years and only one study showed such results for chronic users. Just about everybody agrees that it requires more study. Even the issues with celebrex were only detected at 2x to 4x the normal dose (200mg), and this was a single study focused on Alzheimers not the safety of Celebrex. The media just likes a good obsessive binge now and again. Erik

Response:

I sure hope Celebrex doesn’t get pulled,, it makes it possible for me to walk without my cane some days. It doesn’t do much for head pain,, but really helps joint pain for me. Bear – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Safety of Celebrex and Naproxen Questioned An ongoing clinical trial investigating a new use of the Cox-2 inhibitor Celebrex (celecoxib) to prevent colon polyps, which was being conducted by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and Pfizer, Inc., has been discontinued because of an increased risk of cardiovascular events in patients taking Celebrex versus those taking a placebo. This follows closely behind… http://headaches.about.com/od/medsarticlesandinfo/a/celebrex_naprox.htm

Response:

well I had a reaction to bactrim once and my doctor said that because of that if I ever was inclined to I needed to steer clear of Celebrex. (It was cute- he asked if I had heard of it and sang the commercial ditty for me :) mk You’re welcome, Michelle. I’m waiting to see on Celebrex since the dosages in the trial that showed the problem were higher than normal. Guess I’ll talk to my cardiologist when I see him next month and see what he says. Unfortunately, I’ve tried many other arthritis meds, and Celebrex is the one that really works for me. It lets me actually move fairly easily, even in the morning, and it controls the arthritis in my hands to allow me to work. I keep wondering, "What next?" hugs, Teri | Thanks, Teri! I just knew this was coming and it makes me question other | seemingly safe drugs, even though drugs inherently are not safe. | | Michelle | |

Response:

You’re welcome, Michelle. I’m waiting to see on Celebrex since the dosages in the trial that showed the problem were higher than normal. Guess I’ll talk to my cardiologist when I see him next month and see what he says. Unfortunately, I’ve tried many other arthritis meds, and Celebrex is the one that really works for me. It lets me actually move fairly easily, even in the morning, and it controls the arthritis in my hands to allow me to work. I keep wondering, "What next?" hugs, Teri

| Thanks, Teri! I just knew this was coming and it makes me question other | seemingly safe drugs, even though drugs inherently are not safe. | | Michelle | |

Response:

Thanks, Teri! I just knew this was coming and it makes me question other seemingly safe drugs, even though drugs inherently are not safe. Michelle

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Safety of Celebrex and Naproxen Questioned An ongoing clinical trial investigating a new use of the Cox-2 inhibitor Celebrex (celecoxib) to prevent colon polyps, which was being conducted by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and Pfizer, Inc., has been discontinued because of an increased risk of cardiovascular events in patients taking Celebrex versus those taking a placebo. This follows closely behind… http://headaches.about.com/od/medsarticlesandinfo/a/celebrex_naprox.htm — Teri Robert, Ph.D. Migraineur * Journalist/Patient Advocate www.helpforheadaches.com www.headaches.about.com * MAGNUM Support Advisor www.migraines.org

Response:

Safety of Celebrex and Naproxen Questioned An ongoing clinical trial investigating a new use of the Cox-2 inhibitor Celebrex (celecoxib) to prevent colon polyps, which was being conducted by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and Pfizer, Inc., has been discontinued because of an increased risk of cardiovascular events in patients taking Celebrex versus those taking a placebo. This follows closely behind… http://headaches.about.com/od/medsarticlesandinfo/a/celebrex_naprox.htm — Teri Robert, Ph.D. Migraineur * Journalist/Patient Advocate www.helpforheadaches.com www.headaches.about.com * MAGNUM Support Advisor www.migraines.org

Response:

I’m right there with you, Bear. I had surger for GERD a few years ago, so stomach issues aren’t as much a problem for me, but I hear you. For me, it’s an issue of having spent many, many $$ and a great deal of time getting no relief while I tried drug after drug that simply didn’t work. hugs, Teri

| | What really gets me is some of the interviews I’ve been seeing with doctors | who are saying there are lots of other meds that will do as well as | Celebrex. Well, let them walk in our shoes for awhile, THEN say that. I’ve | tried SO many other meds, and NO, none of them did anything for me. | | | When they say that I wish they would be put on the spot to name each | and every one that works as well for some one with Barret’s Esoiphogus | and an ulcer right between the stomach and the small intestine. I | haven’t had any problem with the Celebrex that I did with any NSAIDs | so I really want to know what those others that are available are,, my | doc hasn’t heard of any. | | Bear

Response:

What really gets me is some of the interviews I’ve been seeing with doctors who are saying there are lots of other meds that will do as well as Celebrex. Well, let them walk in our shoes for awhile, THEN say that. I’ve tried SO many other meds, and NO, none of them did anything for me.

When they say that I wish they would be put on the spot to name each and every one that works as well for some one with Barret’s Esoiphogus and an ulcer right between the stomach and the small intestine. I haven’t had any problem with the Celebrex that I did with any NSAIDs so I really want to know what those others that are available are,, my doc hasn’t heard of any. Bear

Response:

IMO, this is the problem with many of the media. They sieze the most sensational tidbit from a story, and that’s what they emphasize. The fact is that they’re reviewing TWO studies in particular that involved Celebrex. In one, there were definite problems at doses of 800mg/day, and possibly some problems at 400mg/day. In the other study, there were NO problems at 400mg/day. I’m taking 400mg/day, and have been for several years now. I’m not going to worry about it until I see my cardiologist next month. If we listen to much of the mainstream media, nothing is safe. Then they interview a bunch of doctors who say drugs such as Celebrex aren’t necessary because of all the other arthritis drugs. Really? Let them live in our bodies for awhile before they say that.

I wish they would emphasize points like that- Isn’t that why there are specific dosages? Really can’t ANYTHING cause problems if taken in significantly higher doses? mk

. From all the research I’m finding, I don’t really think they’ll pull it. The one trial where the problem was found, was using significantly higher dosages than area approved and used currently.

Response:

I wish they would emphasize points like that- Isn’t that why there are specific dosages? Really can’t ANYTHING cause problems if taken in significantly higher doses? mk . From all the research I’m finding, I don’t really think they’ll pull it. The one trial where the problem was found, was using significantly higher dosages than area approved and used currently.

Response:

You May as Well Give It Up, Dick Jeff

admin — Tue, 02 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – Consuming a diet that is high in fruits and vegetables seems to reduce the risk of heart attack and strokes, but not cancer, according to a report in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. SOURCE:: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, November 3, 2004.

He that lives on hope will die fasting. — Lady Chatterly "There is no excuse for a mean bot." — blujuju

Response:

may as well dig into those big macs. you are doomed either way. Fruits and Veggies No Help Against Cancer Tue November 02, 2004 04:17 PM ET NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – Consuming a diet that is high in fruits and vegetables seems to reduce the risk of heart attack and strokes, but not cancer, according to a report in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. SOURCE:: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, November 3, 2004. — Talesin- The Bad Boy of Witchcraft ™ "We will not have an all volunteer army!" – George W. Bush http://home.kc.rr.com/pendragonsloft

Atkins Related Deaths(ARDS) – 720,000 a year.

admin — Thu, 22 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

STEVE BAYT The evidence is overwhelming. There is no medical,nutrition or health person or group that calls Atkins anything but a sure bet for a heart attack and other fatalities. The American Heart Association The Cleveland Clinic The Mayo Clinic The Yale University Medical School Every cardiologist throughout the country John Hopkins University. The American Medical Association The American Dietitic Association The National Cancer Institute Baylor College of Medicine ETC. ETC. ETC. Every hospital not financially connected to Atkins A trip to the library to ask for section NF616, a trip to a doctor or going to wwww.americanheart.org www.clevelandclinic.org/heartcenter or www.atkinsalert.org will confirm my research. For the only thing I care about isn’t Internet responses but doctors’ responses in the non-cyber world. For I will achieve a 100% success rate among doctors, nutritionists and dietitians regardless of the idiots who post responses which only delay people getting the serious medical advice needed in the real world. THERE IS NOT ONE DOCTOR anywhere allowed to practice medicine in The United States that is allowed to even mention to clients the Atkins diet as a possible weight loss plan. It violates the policies of the American Medical Association. Anyone on Atkins has one of two choices. Stay on Atkins, or wait for any of the hundreds of fatalities to send you to a Coronary Care Unit-then possibly a funeral. My(not The Plain Dealer’s) next full article: July 27th the 23rd Memorium of Adam Walsh with the hope that Atkins and Adam share only a first letter. If you are on Atkins don’t apologize to loved ones or co-workers from a Coronary Care Unit or hospital bedside vigil. For Love Means Never Having To Say… You’re Sorry.

Response:

Path: internal1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews . com!wns13feed!worldnet.att.net!199.218.7.141!news.glorb.com!postnews2.googl e .com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: alt.support.diet.low-carb,misc.health.alternative,misc.health.diabetes,alt. h ealth,alt.support.diet Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 50 NNTP-Posting-Host: 4.131.17.104 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit GMT) Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.support.diet.low-carb:838552 misc.health.alternative:400737 misc.health.diabetes:295211 alt.health:81525 alt.support.diet:530920 STEVE BAYT The evidence is overwhelming. There is no medical,nutrition or health person or group that calls Atkins anything but a sure bet for a heart attack and other fatalities. The American Heart Association The Cleveland Clinic The Mayo Clinic The Yale University Medical School Every cardiologist throughout the country John Hopkins University. The American Medical Association The American Dietitic Association The National Cancer Institute Baylor College of Medicine ETC. ETC. ETC. Every hospital not financially connected to Atkins A trip to the library to ask for section NF616, a trip to a doctor or going to wwww.americanheart.org www.clevelandclinic.org/heartcenter or www.atkinsalert.org will confirm my research. For the only thing I care about isn’t Internet responses but doctors’ responses in the non-cyber world. For I will achieve a 100% success rate among doctors, nutritionists and dietitians regardless of the idiots who post responses which only delay people getting the serious medical advice needed in the real world. THERE IS NOT ONE DOCTOR anywhere allowed to practice medicine in The United States that is allowed to even mention to clients the Atkins diet as a possible weight loss plan. It violates the policies of the American Medical Association. Anyone on Atkins has one of two choices. Stay on Atkins, or wait for any of the hundreds of fatalities to send you to a Coronary Care Unit-then possibly a funeral. My(not The Plain Dealer’s) next full article: July 27th the 23rd Memorium of Adam Walsh with the hope that Atkins and Adam share only a first letter. If you are on Atkins don’t apologize to loved ones or co-workers from a Coronary Care Unit or hospital bedside vigil. For Love Means Never Having To Say… You’re Sorry.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – STEVE BAYT The evidence is overwhelming. There is no medical,nutrition or health person or group that calls Atkins anything but a sure bet for a heart attack and other fatalities. The American Heart Association The Cleveland Clinic The Mayo Clinic The Yale University Medical School Every cardiologist throughout the country John Hopkins University. The American Medical Association The American Dietitic Association The National Cancer Institute Baylor College of Medicine ETC. ETC. ETC. Every hospital not financially connected to Atkins A trip to the library to ask for section NF616, a trip to a doctor or going to wwww.americanheart.org www.clevelandclinic.org/heartcenter or www.atkinsalert.org will confirm my research. For the only thing I care about isn’t Internet responses but doctors’ responses in the non-cyber world. For I will achieve a 100% success rate among doctors, nutritionists and dietitians regardless of the idiots who post responses which only delay people getting the serious medical advice needed in the real world. THERE IS NOT ONE DOCTOR anywhere allowed to practice medicine in The United States that is allowed to even mention to clients the Atkins diet as a possible weight loss plan. It violates the policies of the American Medical Association. Anyone on Atkins has one of two choices. Stay on Atkins, or wait for any of the hundreds of fatalities to send you to a Coronary Care Unit-then possibly a funeral. My(not The Plain Dealer’s) next full article: July 27th the 23rd Memorium of Adam Walsh with the hope that Atkins and Adam share only a first letter. If you are on Atkins don’t apologize to loved ones or co-workers from a Coronary Care Unit or hospital bedside vigil. For Love Means Never Having To Say… You’re Sorry.

Response:

| STEVE BAYT

Response:

thanks for the urban legend.

Response:

I was saving a good fart for him, but don’t know how to deliver it personally.

In a jar. Worked for me as a kid, doubt technology has made it redundant. The simple things are often the best.

Response:

| STEVE BAYT

I was saving a good fart for him, but don’t know how to deliver it personally.

Response:

I was saving a good fart for him, but don’t know how to deliver it personally. In a jar. Worked for me as a kid, doubt technology has made it redundant. The simple things are often the best.

But sending glass is expensive. Postage, you know. Instead, put it into a zipper bag or one of the ones you can seal on a Foodsaver or similar machine. Cheaper to send and puzzling when it arrives. Looks like an empty bag. Oh, shout a few appropriate insults into the bag and quickly close it. That way, when he opens it, the smell comes out right behind some loud, scary language. Certainly seems the right way to deal with Steve… Pastorio

Response:

THERE IS NOT ONE DOCTOR anywhere allowed to practice medicine in The United States that is allowed to even mention to clients the Atkins diet as a possible weight loss plan. It violates the policies of the American Medical Association.

Sweet Jesus, you are a dimbulb. If you’re going to talk shit, at least learn the vocabulary. Also what the AMA is about. Also what authority they have. It’s crap like this that guarantees that no one brighter than a grapefruit will ever accord you more than a sneering dismissal. Get over it. Pastorio

Response:

From the email address I would guess this guy is also into dietary supplements. BJ

Response:

Everyone needs a hobby or two. — Linda 296/213/160 LC since Oct. 13, 2003 http://home.att.net/~lewis_linda/index.html

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – | STEVE BAYT

Response:

… THERE IS NOT ONE DOCTOR anywhere allowed to practice medicine in The United States that is allowed to even mention to clients the Atkins diet as a possible weight loss plan. It violates the policies of the American Medical Association.

… My doctor was very pleased to hear I’d started atkins. He said (1) in his opinion, any non-starvation diet (WW, BFL, Atkins, South Beach, whatever) is good, because it breaks up your old eating habits and gives you an opportunity to form good ones and (2) research shows that low carb is a little better than the others at lowering cholesterol and weight. Good trolling. (I usually don’t bite).

Response:

| STEVE BAYT

He seems himself as an "E-Journalist", who when he’s not writing his "E-Journalism" articles, appears to spend most of his time watching soap operas.

Response:

What’s yur point? We all know his email is a fake. It’s the posting reference and ID that positively identifies his account. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – BJ

Response:

STEVE BAYT The evidence is overwhelming. There is no medical,nutrition or health person or group that calls Atkins anything but a sure bet for a heart attack and other fatalities.

Such a well thought out posting. How long have you been out of the mental institution. Did you leave with our without your meds. You do need a big steak. I love vegetarian meals, I don’t follow a low carb diet but I think you and your statements are extreme and at variance with current medical thought and treatment for Diabetes.

Response:

You people who have this "thing" about Atkins really crack me up. You know nothing about it, obviously don’t want to know anything about it, and ignore the ovbious. It’s all healthy FOOD, for Christ’s sake!

Response:

STEVE BAYT The evidence is overwhelming. There is no medical,nutrition or health person or group that calls Atkins anything but a sure bet for a heart attack and other fatalities.

My endocrinologist begs to differ. Priscilla

Response:

Ever since this Atkins fad has become so popular, I am considering becoming an undertaker. It should be a thriving business in the next few years until the diet fad wears off. However the medical profession will have to start rejecting organ donors who died from ARDS, since none of these organs will be usable. They better start asking blood donors if they are doing Atkins too. Atkins = Doctor Death You people who have this "thing" about Atkins really crack me up. You know nothing about it, obviously don’t want to know anything about it, and ignore the ovbious. It’s all healthy FOOD, for Christ’s sake!

I think these posters work for the bread and spaghetti making companies. Seriously.

Response:

Ya gotta know Stevie Bayt to understand what is going on. Read his rantings on SB 7822 and how much he did not understand it.

Response:

The evidence is overwhelming. There is no medical,nutrition or health person or group that calls Atkins anything but a sure bet for a heart attack and other fatalities.

I think you will find that most medical, nutrition or health people don’t really know much outside the conventional widsom. Many of them have invested years of their life in learning what they know, it’s quite natural that they’d be hostile to anything that disagrees with them. A trip to the library to ask for section NF616, a trip to a doctor or going to wwww.americanheart.org www.clevelandclinic.org/heartcenter or www.atkinsalert.org will confirm my research.

I can’t seem to connect to the atkinsalert or clevelandclinic sites. The americanheart site doesn’t seem to entirely agree with your initial paragraph, in fact in the articles I’ve read there it seems rather more balanced. For the only thing I care about isn’t Internet responses but doctors’ responses in the non-cyber world. For I will achieve a 100% success rate among doctors, nutritionists and dietitians regardless of the idiots who post responses which only delay people getting the serious medical advice needed in the real world.

A 100% success rate in what? As in real-life results with regards to weight-loss and health or in getting people to agree with you in an Internet argument? I think the success rate of the Atkins diet speaks for itself regardless of the conventional wisdom. THERE IS NOT ONE DOCTOR anywhere allowed to practice medicine in The United States that is allowed to even mention to clients the Atkins diet as a possible weight loss plan. It violates the policies of the American Medical Association.

I think that says more for the stubbornness of the American medical society than it does for the Atkins diet. I for one think that a low-fat, carbohydrate-rich diet is more unhealthy and less productive than a diet in which the macronutrient proportions are tipped more towards fats and proteins, but then again I’m basing my opinion on science and results rather than sticking to the dogma that pays the bills. Anyone on Atkins has one of two choices. Stay on Atkins, or wait for any of the hundreds of fatalities to send you to a Coronary Care Unit-then possibly a funeral.

Are you sure about that? What part of the Atkins diet would induce a heart attack? I didn’t realise that protein and unsaturated fats were harmful to the heart, or that high carbohydrate intake was necessary for maintaining a healthy heart. If you are on Atkins don’t apologize to loved ones or co-workers from a Coronary Care Unit or hospital bedside vigil. For Love Means Never Having To Say… You’re Sorry.

What’s with all the fanatical scaremongering? Can’t we debate this like adults?

Response:

OPEN LETTER

admin — Mon, 10 May 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

OPEN LETTER I have been accused by a few members of this board of being ‘irresponsible’ and ‘endangering’ the lives of young people. This accusation could possibly be correct, but is based on one fundamental assumption. The assumption being that I am wrong in my assessments and they are right. Clearly I do not consider that to be the case. If ‘AIDS’ really is a sexually transmitted disease and condoms really do really afford protection then my advice could lead to tragic infections and moralities. Good reason to suppress my views you may well think? Let me say this before you rush to send an e-mail requesting the boards moderators ban my ‘dangerous information’ for this forum. The assumption that my views are dangerous is based on your understanding of the issues at hand. That understanding, in turn, is based on the information you have been exposed to. Clearly, if for financial, political and religious reasons all opposing information has been censored in a ‘politically correct’ manner, you have only half the picture. If my view is correct then million of people are dying of highly toxic drugs like Haart and AZT for a virus that is not the cause of their real condition. Millions more are dying because their real condition is not being treated and a harmless virus is receiving all the attention. Millions are being exposed to deadly carcinogens and toxins in condoms that afford no protection. I could say that the posts promoting ‘AIDS awareness’, antibody test (for a virus that has NEVER been isolated) and ’safe sex’ are irresponsible and potentially deadly. It all depends on who is right and who is wrong and the only way to determine that is by reviewing ALL the evidence and subjecting it to informed and rational debate. That is the very purpose of a forum like this and that is why nobody should be censored (except for insults, personal attacks and childish name calling). The issues are of the greatest importance to us all and together we must explore the evidence on both sides of the question in an open minded manner. I respect every shade of opinion and only wish to establish the truth. Best wishes, Paul

Response:

This is and "un-moderated" newsgroup Paul if you have done any Google searches of this news group you would see that a huge percentage of the posts to misc.health.aids are from people such as your self that are for one reason or another (fear, ignorance, the need to feel important, or one of the hundred other misguided reasons for conspiracy theorists or anti-science flat earth type of thinking) unable to read the scientific literature on HIV/AIDS and come to the conclusion that HIV indeed is the cause of AIDS and that AIDS is an incredibly deadly illness. The assumption that my views are dangerous is based on your understanding of the issues at hand. That understanding, in turn, is based on the information you have been exposed to. Clearly, if for financial, political and religious reasons all opposing information has been censored in a ‘politically correct’ manner, you have only half the picture. If my view is correct then million of people are dying of highly toxic drugs like Haart and AZT for a virus that is not the cause of their real condition. Millions more are dying because their real condition is not being treated and a harmless virus is receiving all the attention. Millions are being exposed to deadly carcinogens and toxins in condoms that afford no protection.

Again I ask you how is it that I am alive after spending the last 9 years taking large amounts of "highly toxic drugs like Haart and AZT" and how do you explain the fact that my health is substantially better today then it was in 1995 when I started taking your so called highly toxic AIDS drugs? By the way I have been taking AZT for 7 out of the 9 years. Now remember that there are tens of thousands of people like me in the world that your theory simply wishes did not exist because it is so darn hard for you to explain away our existence and still stay true to your fantasy about HIV and AIDS. Gary Stein

Response:

The assumption that the majority is always right flies in the face of all recorded history. It would be easier to make the case that the majority opinion, at any given point in history, is usually wrong and the product of economic and political imperatives. Science is not based on belief but rational thought. I believe in NOT believing but thinking. Best wishes, Paul

Response:

"By the way I have been taking AZT for 7 out of the 9 years." Reaction to toxins depend on factors that are different with each person. People have lived to a ripe old age on Herion but that does not mean the drug is harmless or healthy. Your resistance to AZT is the exception not the rule and your improved health may be the result of any number of factors. To believe one is the result of the other without controlled study is simply blind belief. Believe what you will but done confuse it with proof or logic. Best wishes, Paul

Response:

The assumption that the majority is always right flies in the face of all recorded history.

That is SUCH a lame defense and means ABSOLUTELY nothing. It would be easier to make the case that the majority opinion, at any given point in history, is usually wrong and the product of economic and political imperatives. Science is not based on belief but rational thought. I believe in NOT believing but thinking.

And THAT is a demonstrable delusion, Paul. You do NOT think or at least not very well. You certainly are bright enough to be able to learn and think, unlike your apparent mentor in stupidity and lying, George W. Bush. But you have been provided evidence and data that contradicts the sloppily constructed conspiracy theory of the denialists–and the REAL problems are missed by you. There ARE issues that the "AIDS establishment" routinely fucks up. The simplest is that millions are dying needlessly due to lack of access to medication. And you completely avoided looking at the reality of why people who take handsfull of toxic drugs do BETTER. No, ARV is not a cure. It IS toxic–and for some who are more sensitive, these toxicities can range from debilitating to fatal. And therein is ANOTHER critical issue that AIDS, Inc. has done a piss poor job of working on–there are LOTS of natural compounds, without a patent, that many thousands of people are using to manage those side effects. Are they helping? If not, then we should get that evidence-based medicine data out there and help people redirect their resources. If they DO benefit people, then maybe they should be covered so anyone that needs them can have access–and ultimately, being less costly, these can help reduce the burden to public costs. Course we’d rather spend, apparently, in the US HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of dollars on a completely incompetently planned and "executed" war of revenge and oil at the cost of lives and world opinion to satisfy the most corrupt administration in American history. George M. Carter

Response:

It doesn’t mean heroin or AZT causes AIDS either. But actually, you picked a bad example. Heroin is relatively non-toxic. The problems with heroin are 1) constipation; 2) overdose can be fatal; 3) it’s addictive. Street drugs can be fake, stepped on or contain other poisons. Otherwise, compared to many other drugs, it has a pretty mild toxicity profile. Pregnant women using it may cause developmental neurological problems in their children–and there can be some neurological problems possibly. Your resistance to AZT is the exception not the rule and your improved health may be the result of any number of factors.

No, it’s not. AZT does NOT cause AIDS. It MAY cause anemia or neutropenia. To believe one is the result of the other without controlled study is simply blind belief. Believe what you will but done confuse it with proof or logic.

Ah–your lot assert that AZT causes AIDS. Where is there ANY evidence that AZT use causes a persistent decline in CD4+ count? George M. Carter

Response:

Great post which shows the true philosophy and spirit of scientific enquiry. The obnoxious replies of the pharmo shills demonstrate their inability or unwillingness to share that spirit.

Bellow is my reply to Paul’s original post which is not an "obnoxious" reply but rather a serious question for Paul, Yourself and Uiopp none of whom made any attempt what so ever to address the issues I raised. Thus your post is the proverbial Pot calling the Kettle Black. Gary Stein

This is and "un-moderated" newsgroup Paul if you have done any Google searches of this news group you would see that a huge percentage of the posts to misc.health.aids are from people such as your self that are for one reason or another unable to read the scientific literature on HIV/AIDS and come to the conclusion that HIV indeed is the cause of AIDS and that AIDS is an incredibly deadly illness. The assumption that my views are dangerous is based on your understanding of the issues at hand. That understanding, in turn, is based on the information you have been exposed to. Clearly, if for financial, political and religious reasons all opposing information has been censored in a ‘politically correct’ manner, you have only half the picture. If my view is correct then million of people are dying of highly toxic drugs like Haart and AZT for a virus that is not the cause of their real condition. Millions more are dying because their real condition is not being treated and a harmless virus is receiving all the attention. Millions are being exposed to deadly carcinogens and toxins in condoms that afford no protection.

Again I ask you how is it that I am alive after spending the last 9 years taking large amounts of "highly toxic Haart drugs like AZT" and how do you explain the fact that my health is substantially better today then it was in 1995 when I started taking your so called highly toxic AIDS drugs? By the way I have been taking AZT for 7 out of the 9 years. (Added May 25th for extra detail. In 1994 I was diagnosed with AIDS my first CD4 count was 54, and in December of that year I had my first case of PCP. Then in May of 1995 during my second bout of PCP my CD4 count was down to 17 finally in November of 1995 I had my third bout of PCP which almost killed me I was literly a few days away from dieing. I was in the hospital for almost a month and only during the final week were the doctors able to find a treatment that brought the PCP under control. I underwent a bronchoscopy, a needle biopsy, and finally two surgical biopsies of the PCP mass in my upper right lung as the doctors tried to find a medication that would bring it under control. A doctor came into my room one morning and asked me if I wanted to try an at that time experimental drug combination to treat the PCP. It contained the following meds IV Trimetrexate, oral Leucovorin, IV Amphotericin B, and oral Flucytosine to try and get the PCP under control. Let me tell you it was a scary experience to see the nurse walk into my room later that morning wearing a full biohazard suit. The Trimetrexate is labeled as chemotherapy of the most toxic kind requiring high levels of protection for the health care workers that administer it. After a week on this treatment my doctor had a PIC line installed in my arm (this is a surgically implanted IV line that makes the administration of IV medications easier for the patient to receive at home, a very small plastic line is inserted into a vein in the arm and under X-ray run all the way up to the heart valve then surgically fastened to the arm at the entry point.) and I was released. I had daily IV treatment for almost another month before the PCP was finally gone. Due to this case of PCP I lost 15% of my lung capacity. It was during that hospital stay that I began my first anti-viral drug treatment regimen and since then my CD4 counts climbed back up to the 300’s and viral load has been consistently low though I have only achieved undetectable viral load levels for short periods of time at the beginning of new drug combinations. Remember that at the day of my diagnosis the doctors told me that I had at most 6 months to live based on their past experience with AIDS patients at that point in the history of HIV/AIDS, next year I will have beat those odd’s by a decade yet you claim it is the anti-viral Now remember that there are tens of thousands of people like me in the US alone that your theory simply wishes did not exist because it is so darn hard for you to explain away our existence and still stay true to your theory about HIV and AIDS. Gary Stein

Response:

Great post which shows the true philosophy and spirit of scientific enquiry. The obnoxious replies of the pharmo shills demonstrate their inability or unwillingness to share that spirit.

Response:

In article OPEN LETTER I have been accused by a few members of this board of being ‘irresponsible’ and ‘endangering’ the lives of young people. This accusation could possibly be correct, but is based on one fundamental assumption. The assumption being that I am wrong in my assessments and they are right. Clearly I do not consider that to be the case. If ‘AIDS’ really is a sexually transmitted disease and condoms really do really afford protection then my advice could lead to tragic infections and moralities. Good reason to suppress my views you may well think?

That depends what your advice is. Are you suggesting not using condoms, rejecting safe sex? That isn’t the Perth Group’s position.

Response:

That depends what your advice is. Are you suggesting not using condoms, rejecting safe sex? That isn’t the Perth Group’s position.

No, it is not the Perth Group’s position, but it is Paul King’s position. See his web site for example: http://www.aimultimedia.com/aidsmythexposed/arc_pages/main_frameset.html Where it says: "CONDOMS POSE REAL DANGERS Are condoms a greater health risk than the std’s they don’t really protect against? It is politically correct to advocate condoms but every day the evidence increases that they do little to protect and may pose a very serious health risk." To me, that sounds like suggesting to people that they should not use condoms.

Response:

<< Again I ask you how is it that I am alive after spending the last 9 years taking large amounts of "highly toxic drugs like Haart and AZT" and how do you explain the fact that my health is substantially better today then it was in 1995 when I started taking your so called highly toxic AIDS drugs? By the way I have been taking AZT for 7 out of the 9 years. Now remember that there are tens of thousands of people like me in the world that your theory simply wishes did not exist because it is so darn hard for you to explain away our existence and still stay true to your fantasy about HIV and AIDS. Gary Stein It’s easy to explain that. "Paul King" is a liar. He will never answer a question like that. He can’t. All he can do is make up more lies. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – AZT was first developed in 1964 as a cancer chemotherapy drug. It was designed to destroy proliferating cells. Later at the US National Cancer Institute in Maryland it was tested as an AIDS drug. Normally cancer chemotherapy drugs are used for limited periods but AZT is given for open ended use. It’s effect on the body can be very serious. Some people simply can’t tolerate it and suffer vomiting, muscle pain and unendurable headaches. Lower doses produce less side effects but on high doses bone marrow cells are affected with up to 30% of recipients needing blood transfusions. DR. ROBERT HOFFMAN: "I believe that the drug AZT can have at least two important areas of toxicity and that is the inhibition of production of critical white cells and also the production of malignant cells such as lymphoma cells. The two courses can be monitored but they can also reach the point of no return where nothing can be done about it. So even with monitoring, these toxicities can be life threatening." Although the effects of AZT also called by its generic name zidovudine are listed in Wellcome’s US and UK information sheets for doctors, their promotional leaflet for doctors and the public in the UK makes some startling claims about AZT’s safety and efficacy. For example, it states here that doctors can manage the serious blood problems and ‘there are no life threatening toxicities associated with zidovudine.’ These and other claims have encouraged some doctors and patients to embark upon high dose therapies, sometimes over long periods of time. There is evidence that some of these claims are false and others seriously misleading. There are worrying differences and omissions between the US and UK doctor’s information sheets. Before a drug is licensed for use it normally has to undergo animal toxicity studies and clinical trials in humans. No long-term animal studies were completed when AZT was licensed. The clinical studies in humans – called phase-II – which led to the licensing of AZT were financed by Wellcome. They were presented as complying with the only reliable scientific test for a drug – double blind studies – and published in the New England Journal of Medicine in July 1987. In this type of trial one group is given the drug and the other a placebo or a dummy tablet. Neither the volunteers nor their doctors should know who is getting what, in order to eliminate any bias in expectation of what a particular treatment, or no treatment, may do. This is called blinding. In this document Wellcome claims that: ‘Non of the volunteers or the clinicians involved knew who had received placebo and who had received the active drug.’ We have the following evidence that the trials became unblinded early on. This internal document from the Food and Drug Administration, the US authority that licensed the drug, was obtained through the freedom of information procedure. Dr. Ellen Cooper in reviewing the AZT data writes: ‘The fact that the treatment groups unblinded themselves early could have resulted in bias in the work up of patients.’ If the FDA knew this then Wellcome would have been incompetent not to know.

Response:

"Paul King" is a liar. He will never answer a question like that. He can’t. All he can do is make up more lies.

He lies, and seems oddly unconcerned about how obviously dishonest some of his lies are. This is not the behaviour of somebody who sincerely wants to advance a dissident position. Obvious lies discredit both him and the position he seems to be supporting with them. — David Canzi The problem most anti-spammers are trying to solve, when correctly understood, reduces to "How do I let everybody in the world send me e-mail without letting everybody in the world send me e-mail?"

Response:

In 1993, the Concorde Study, which was the first major study on AZT that was not underwritten by the drug?s manufacturer, found that patients who received AZT had a 25 percent higher death rate than those who received a placebo. AZT?s status as a ?miracle drug? that dramatically reduces the rate of mother-to-child transmission of HIV was resurrected in 1994 after the ACTG 076 study, which was funded by AZT manufacturer Glaxo Wellcome.

Response:

The assumption that the majority is always right flies in the face of all recorded history.

Where did Gary make that assumption in the article you’re responding to? Science is not based on belief but rational thought. I believe in NOT believing but thinking.

"What is believed as ’scientific fact’ is substantially determined by political/economic/religious expediency NOT rational thought, substantiated demonstration or even simple common sense." — Paul King, misc.health.aids, 2004-05-01. It’s a wonderful feeling to be right when most people are wrong. Being wrong when most people are right feels just the same, and it’s easier. — David Canzi The problem most anti-spammers are trying to solve, when correctly understood, reduces to "How do I let everybody in the world send me e-mail without letting everybody in the world send me e-mail?"

Response:

hnetwork.com: In 1993, the Concorde Study, which was the first major study on AZT that was not underwritten by the drug

Welcome to the USSA !

admin — Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Nice GWB, be prepared in the next ten years a rocketing number of heterosexual people having STD rates worse than what the homosexual community had at the height of the AIDs/HIV outbreak. Yet it didn’t happen 20 years ago when the gay lobby was clamoring for more spending on AIDS research (an effort which has effectively issed billions down a rathole because dissenting the party line regarding the cause and nature of AIDS is politically incorrect). What makes you think it’s going to happen now? More of that christian science no doubt. No doubt in your closed little mind. How about explaining the statements from these individuals?

You can try to cloud your bigotry under a bunch of irrelevant crapola, but the fact is the issue here in not homosexuality it is equal rights. AIDS is Disease is not a sexual orientation, a gay can marry a lesbian proving it has nothing to do with their sexual orientation. Your lot love to yell the sky is falling and Segregation Now, Segregation Forever, but it is irrelevant to equal rights issues. If a man can marry a woman the woman must have the same right as a man or her equal rights have been violated. "Many court watchers believe that within five to 10 years the U.S. Supreme Court will hold that there is a constitutional right to homosexual marriage, … The chosen instrument will be the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. After all, if state law forbids Fred to marry Henry, aren’t they denied equal protection when the law permits Tom and Jane to marry?" By Judge Robert H. Bork, US Supreme Court nominee

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Nice GWB, be prepared in the next ten years a rocketing number of heterosexual people having STD rates worse than what the homosexual community had at the height of the AIDs/HIV outbreak. Yet it didn’t happen 20 years ago when the gay lobby was clamoring for more spending on AIDS research (an effort which has effectively issed billions down a rathole because dissenting the party line regarding the cause and nature of AIDS is politically incorrect). What makes you think it’s going to happen now? More of that christian science no doubt. Revisionist history. During these critical years, at the dawn of this pandemic, President Ronald Reagan remained silent. Although his supporters liked to call him "The Great Communicator," it took President Reagan seven years to publicly acknowledge the existence of the disease. AIDS, which in 1981 – the first year of Reagan’s term in office – had been diagnosed in roughly 335 people and took the lives of 158, exploded exponentially while he and his administration maintained a regime of silence in the face of the growing pandemic. Six years later, in 1987, when President Reagan finally uttered the word "AIDS" in public, over 71,000 people had been diagnosed in the United States and over 41,000 of them had died. In those shameful years of silence, the number of HIV/AIDS diagnoses had jumped 21,000 percent; the number of AIDS deaths had jumped 25,900 percent. The failure of U.S. leadership, as well as political leadership around the world, at the outset of this crisis was blatant and unforgivable. Ignorance and denial and a stark homophobia squandered our best chance to face up to the threat, and control its devastating effects on our nation. Statement of Congressman Bernie Sanders (I) on 5/2/2003 http://bernie.house.gov/statements/20030505173231.asp

Oh sure. It’s all Reagan’s fault. He was spending his nights in homo bars spreading the disease, wasn’t he? Perhaps you missed the newspapers of the day and didn’t read the pieces about the massive hosexual protests when the local governements in places lke San Fransisco attempted to do anything. Rememeber the protests when they suggested closing down the "bath houses"? I guess that’s Reagan’s fault too. Reagan was a great genetisist who designed the HIV virus, wasn’t he? What kind of lunatic takes stupid risks and them blames the president when he get’s himself hurt? William R. James

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – | | | | | Just how much did the USA piss am moan when China introduced | their birth control measures to control women’s bodies and control | their bodies in reproduction, now the USA is doing the very same | thing. There is no difference between the USA and the former | USSR and China, only the name has changed. | | If you can’t see the obvious difference between America and the USSR or | Red | China you need a course in history. | | The USSR had gulags the USSA has Guantanamo, where the | federal court orders of habeas corpus has denied, the denial a | speedy trial and representation, a gulag. | | The people currently in Gitmo were ARMED COMBATANTS who in almost all cases | are NOT US citizens. They weren’t observing Geneva Convention rules | regarding belligerents (wearing distinct uniforms, identification with the | fighting forces of a legitimate recognized nation, committing acts of | violence while held as prisoners), so they are in effect "unlawful | combatants" and are treated as such. Those in Russia’s Gulags were CIVILIANS | and CITIZENS of the Soviet Union who often wound up there for voicing | dissent of Soviet policies. In fact, if the USSR existed today, you could | have been hauled off merely for posting your opinions on Usenet. The fact | that you able to log in here everday and post your absolute nonsense with no | fear of recrimination or retailiation by the US Government is clear proof | that there’s no parallel, and that you are either seriously out of touch | with reality or spreading deliberate falsehoods to further your extreme | leftist agenda. | Nothing allows the US to ignore the Geneva convention.

Wrong. Protection under the Geneva Convention works both ways – if you country doesn’t accept the conditions placed on it, you are not entitled to protection from it. For example, combatants can’t be prosecuted for killing other combatants. However, if soldiers from A surrender to B, they are no longer considered combatants but are prisoners. B is responsible for their safety and well being upon their ceasing combat. If return, the soldiers from A are incarcerated and must cease hostilities. If the soldiers from A that are incarcerated violate that provision, they can be tried as criminals under the military justice system of B. For example, all those Taliban soldiers involved in that prison revolt that killed that CIA agent in Afghanistan can be tried as murderers under the UCMJ of the US Armed Forces. No Johnny Cochran, no civilian jury, no governor commuting sentences. They could have been legally hanged the next day and there wouldn’t have been a single thing under the Geneva accords that demanded otherwise.

Response:

Does that mean they are irrelevant or wrong? How do you come up with that? Do you doubt that 20 years ago that all the doomsayers were telling us that there was going to be huge heterosexual epidemic? WHERE IS IT? Whole populations of countries (heterosexual) face complete eradication and/or extinction in Africa.

No they don’t. Africans have been dying of the same shit (influenza, diarrhea, dysentery, wasting disease) for ages, as a result of malnutrition, poor santiation/hygeine practices, and lack of proper medical care – all the results of POVERTY, not some retruvirus that it so weak that it needs to reproduced under testing conditions thousands of times to be even detectable. Most so-called AIDS cases in Africa are NOT diagnosed by testing, due it’s cost – they are diagnosed by SYMPTOMS which are hardly unique to AIDS. Even though many Africans realize it’s a joke, their governments go along with it because they know the goo-goo gullible Americans will send money to combat AIDS more readily than they will finance more mundane (but badly needed) courses of action, such as developing fresh water supplies and sewage treatment plants. Face it – when was the last time you saw a Hollywood entertainment personality wearing a brown ribbon for Diarrhea Awareness Month?

Response:

Most quoted references are about 10 years old or more. How do you come up with that? Do you doubt that 20 years ago that all the doomsayers were telling us that there was going to be huge heterosexual epidemic? WHERE IS IT?

Whole populations of countries (heterosexual) face complete eradication and/or extinction in Africa. Shan

Response:

| |

| | Just how much did the USA piss am moan when China introduced | their birth control measures to control women’s bodies and control | their bodies in reproduction, now the USA is doing the very same | thing. There is no difference between the USA and the former | USSR and China, only the name has changed. | | If you can’t see the obvious difference between America and the USSR or | Red | China you need a course in history. | | The USSR had gulags the USSA has Guantanamo, where the | federal court orders of habeas corpus has denied, the denial a | speedy trial and representation, a gulag. | | The people currently in Gitmo were ARMED COMBATANTS who in almost all cases | are NOT US citizens. They weren’t observing Geneva Convention rules | regarding belligerents (wearing distinct uniforms, identification with the | fighting forces of a legitimate recognized nation, committing acts of | violence while held as prisoners), so they are in effect "unlawful | combatants" and are treated as such. Those in Russia’s Gulags were CIVILIANS | and CITIZENS of the Soviet Union who often wound up there for voicing | dissent of Soviet policies. In fact, if the USSR existed today, you could | have been hauled off merely for posting your opinions on Usenet. The fact | that you able to log in here everday and post your absolute nonsense with no | fear of recrimination or retailiation by the US Government is clear proof | that there’s no parallel, and that you are either seriously out of touch | with reality or spreading deliberate falsehoods to further your extreme | leftist agenda. | | Nothing allows the US to ignore the Geneva convention. M

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – | | | | | Just how much did the USA piss am moan when China introduced | their birth control measures to control women’s bodies and control | their bodies in reproduction, now the USA is doing the very same | thing. There is no difference between the USA and the former | USSR and China, only the name has changed. | | If you can’t see the obvious difference between America and the USSR or | Red | China you need a course in history. | | The USSR had gulags the USSA has Guantanamo, where the | federal court orders of habeas corpus has denied, the denial a | speedy trial and representation, a gulag. | | The people currently in Gitmo were ARMED COMBATANTS who in almost all cases | are NOT US citizens. They weren’t observing Geneva Convention rules | regarding belligerents (wearing distinct uniforms, identification with the | fighting forces of a legitimate recognized nation, committing acts of | violence while held as prisoners), so they are in effect "unlawful | combatants" and are treated as such. Those in Russia’s Gulags were CIVILIANS | and CITIZENS of the Soviet Union who often wound up there for voicing | dissent of Soviet policies. In fact, if the USSR existed today, you could | have been hauled off merely for posting your opinions on Usenet. The fact | that you able to log in here everday and post your absolute nonsense with no | fear of recrimination or retailiation by the US Government is clear proof | that there’s no parallel, and that you are either seriously out of touch | with reality or spreading deliberate falsehoods to further your extreme | leftist agenda. | | Nothing allows the US to ignore the Geneva convention. M

You haven’t shown that the Geneva Convention is being ignored.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just how much did the USA piss am moan when China introduced their birth control measures to control women’s bodies and control their bodies in reproduction, now the USA is doing the very same thing. There is no difference between the USA and the former USSR and China, only the name has changed. If you can’t see the obvious difference between America and the USSR or Red China you need a course in history. If youu cannot see that the government FORCING women to follow it’s rules (either getting an abortion, or denying them an abortion) is the SAME – no matter what nation it is in …….you need a course in reality! Oh, great! Yet another abortion absolutist… It’s called freedom of choice!

Where does "freedom of choice" end and "murder" begin? It’s a legitimate question, whether you belive it’s at birth, conception, or somewhere in between.

Response:

But the government isn’t denying individuals abortions provided that they are early in the term. It IS presenting the argument that at one point it is no LONGER a fetus but a human being, and that waiting until a point in the pregnancy where the baby could conceivably live outside the body to basically pull it out and butcher it crosses the line. Sorry you can’t make that distinction. The people currently in Gitmo were ARMED COMBATANTS who in almost all cases are NOT US citizens. Armed combatants AGAINST a rogue nation that had invaded their country

How are we a "rogue nation"? And yes, we invaded their country after they attacked our shore and declared war on us. If you believe otherwise, then you’re completely out of touch with reality. "legal limbo", where even their Geneva Convention rights arenot being allowed! They weren’t observing Geneva Convention rules Neither is George Bush!!!!!!

Proof? Show me the sections that he is violating – go ahead.

Response:

No doubt in your closed little mind. How about explaining the statements from these individuals? a.. Dr. Kary Mullis, Biochemist, 1993 Nobel Prize for Chemistry: "If there is evidence that HIV causes AIDS, there should be scientific documents which either singly or collectively demonstrate that fact, at least with a high probability. There is no such document." (Sunday Times (London) 28 nov. 1993) a.. Dr. Heinz Ludwig S

Welcome to the USSA !

admin — Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Response:

Where does "freedom of choice" end and "murder" begin? It’s a legitimate question, whether you belive it’s at birth, conception, or somewhere in between.

Response:

Whole populations of countries (heterosexual) face complete eradication and/or extinction in Africa. Shan

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – | | | | | Just how much did the USA piss am moan when China introduced | their birth control measures to control women’s bodies and control | their bodies in reproduction, now the USA is doing the very same | thing. There is no difference between the USA and the former | USSR and China, only the name has changed. | | If you can’t see the obvious difference between America and the USSR or | Red | China you need a course in history. | | The USSR had gulags the USSA has Guantanamo, where the | federal court orders of habeas corpus has denied, the denial a | speedy trial and representation, a gulag. | | The people currently in Gitmo were ARMED COMBATANTS who in almost all cases | are NOT US citizens. They weren’t observing Geneva Convention rules | regarding belligerents (wearing distinct uniforms, identification with the | fighting forces of a legitimate recognized nation, committing acts of | violence while held as prisoners), so they are in effect "unlawful | combatants" and are treated as such. Those in Russia’s Gulags were CIVILIANS | and CITIZENS of the Soviet Union who often wound up there for voicing | dissent of Soviet policies. In fact, if the USSR existed today, you could | have been hauled off merely for posting your opinions on Usenet. The fact | that you able to log in here everday and post your absolute nonsense with no | fear of recrimination or retailiation by the US Government is clear proof | that there’s no parallel, and that you are either seriously out of touch | with reality or spreading deliberate falsehoods to further your extreme | leftist agenda. | | Nothing allows the US to ignore the Geneva convention. M

You haven’t shown that the Geneva Convention is being ignored.

Response:

| |

Response:

Proof? Show me the sections that he is violating – go ahead.

Response:

Nice GWB, be prepared in the next ten years a rocketing number of heterosexual people having STD rates worse than what the homosexual community had at the height of the AIDs/HIV outbreak. Yet it didn’t happen 20 years ago when the gay lobby was clamoring for more spending on AIDS research (an effort which has effectively issed billions down a rathole because dissenting the party line regarding the cause and nature of AIDS is politically incorrect). What makes you think it’s going to happen now?

More of that christian science no doubt. Revisionist history. During these critical years, at the dawn of this pandemic, President Ronald Reagan remained silent. Although his supporters liked to call him "The Great Communicator," it took President Reagan seven years to publicly acknowledge the existence of the disease. AIDS, which in 1981 – the first year of Reagan’s term in office – had been diagnosed in roughly 335 people and took the lives of 158, exploded exponentially while he and his administration maintained a regime of silence in the face of the growing pandemic. Six years later, in 1987, when President Reagan finally uttered the word "AIDS" in public, over 71,000 people had been diagnosed in the United States and over 41,000 of them had died. In those shameful years of silence, the number of HIV/AIDS diagnoses had jumped 21,000 percent; the number of AIDS deaths had jumped 25,900 percent. The failure of U.S. leadership, as well as political leadership around the world, at the outset of this crisis was blatant and unforgivable. Ignorance and denial and a stark homophobia squandered our best chance to face up to the threat, and control its devastating effects on our nation. Statement of Congressman Bernie Sanders (I) on 5/2/2003 http://bernie.house.gov/statements/20030505173231.asp

Response:

Lots Of Accusations Flying Around.

admin — Mon, 29 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

Sure, Call Stinesville School and see if a Jan graduated in 1957. I couldn’t believe they had this information. Not only did Jan get a GED in ‘57 (amazing isn’t it) they also offered that she was the most abusive Hall Monitor in the history of Stinesville High.

Jan was voted least likely to succeed and most likely to become a Health Slut. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -carabelli

Response:

I am not a member of any committee with that name. A woman who works with Jennie Burke is a member of a committee with a name like that. She must be trying to shut down quackery. Complain to Jennie Burke. Better known as the Anti-Quackery committee. Quackery (in your world) being anything not endorsed by *organized medicine*

Quackery, in my world, being fraudulent "cures" which have no possibility of working and which are designed to steal money from unsuspecting people. Remember that the committee you don’t like was set up as a direct result of a naturopath killing a child. The word Protection is a lie, just like it is on Barrett’s website. If you were protecting the public, you would list the biggest killers, the most needless mistakes, the adverse effect of drugs.

I have paid my VERY OWN money to be a member of an organisation looking at those very things. What patient safety organisations are you a member of, Jan? I didn’t think so. All talk, no action. Instead, organized medicine goes after people like Dr. Kadile, EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS NOT ONE SINGLE PATIENT COMPLAINT.

It is very rare for the victims of murder to complain, yet the police prosecute murderers all the time. Perhaps Alan Yurko should have used the Kadile Defence – the baby didn’t complain. That little tid bit tells us all we need to know. Plus the fact that Barrett and his ilk are NOT qualified to judge. They are heavily biased and not credible.

I believe that Dr Barrett has similar qualifications to Dr Burzynski. Dr Baratz, who you have vilified in this very newsgroup as being an inadequate witness in the Kadile hearing has the degrees of MD, DDS and PhD. I assume you are now agreeing that he is "qualified to judge", or are you selective about whose degrees you accept and whose you don’t? (Rhetorical question.) So where does that leave YOU?????

I do not understand the question.

So, Jan, you don’t care if he got it out of a corn flakes box. It is a better PhD than that of, say, Dr Baratz. I’m glad we cleared that up. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -From 1970 to 1977, he served as a researcher and assistant professor at the Baylor School of Medicine in Houston, Texas, where his research was sponsored and partially funded by the National Cancer Institute. In May 1977 he founded the Burzynski Clinic in Houston where he has treated over 8,000 patients. He also serves as director of the Burzynski Research Institute, where he continues to pursue scientific research on causes and treatments for cancer. Dr. Burzynski, is the author and co-author of 182 scientific publications and is the recipient of numerous prestigious awards. He currently holds 160 patents in 35 countries for his treatments and inventions, and he has been the subject of many articles and interviews. Only 9 of those 182 "scientific publications" were worth publishing. Prove it. You are famous for lying.

Go to http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=PubMed Search for ‘burzynski sr" See where it says "Items 1-20 of 38" Look at all the ones where "Burzynski, SR" is listed as author. If he wrote them all it would only be 38, not 182. As it happens, he wrote 9 of them.

Any recommendations for rad onc in Baltimore (or DC) area?

admin — Wed, 08 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0000

Question:

It’s a stretch for me Bev. I wouldn’t be able to commute. I’d have to get a hotel room and stay there the whole time – which would be hard in terms of lost work, living cost, and most importantly, I’d have to go through it without the presence of my wife, or else ask her to close down her counseling practice for that time – which would be hard for her and very hard on her clients. I’ve been seen at the National Cancer Institute (where I work as a computer programmer), and the doctors there are truly superb. I’m thinking very seriously of joining one of their clinical trials. The upside is superb care, and incredibly, it’s free. The downside is that I have to take the therapy being tested in the trial and can’t just have something specifically tailored for me. Ah well, as Curtis says, we have to play the cards that are on the table. Thanks. Alan

Is Richmond ,Virginia too far away? Bev I belong to an HMO and don’t know that I will have any choices through them, but if anyone knows someone they think is very good, I’d be very pleased to hear about it.

…

Response:

Is Richmond ,Virginia too far away? Bev

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I belong to an HMO and don’t know that I will have any choices through them, but if anyone knows someone they think is very good, I’d be very pleased to hear about it. The HMO, Kaiser Permanente, seems to provide concerned staff physicians, but they’re a big organization and they have the typical bureaucratic snafus. Asking for a referral to a rad onc specialist almost a week ago, it finally came through today – and was a recommendation back to the same surgery practice I had already seen. Needless to say, they don’t have any radiation people. So now I’ve gone back to the bottom of the hopper. And for this we pay over $8,000 per year. Argghhhh.

Response:

I belong to an HMO and don’t know that I will have any choices through them, but if anyone knows someone they think is very good, I’d be very pleased to hear about it. The HMO, Kaiser Permanente, seems to provide concerned staff physicians, but they’re a big organization and they have the typical bureaucratic snafus. Asking for a referral to a rad onc specialist almost a week ago, it finally came through today – and was a recommendation back to the same surgery practice I had already seen. Needless to say, they don’t have any radiation people. So now I’ve gone back to the bottom of the hopper. And for this we pay over $8,000 per year. Argghhhh.