I read he uses chemo, especially a LOT of chemo for teachers with cancer.

Seems like a primitive approach, and not in line with the Hippocratic Oath.

Thoughts?

This is just my personal opinion as I have no knowledge of specifically why Dr. D recommends what he does.  But, I doubt my hypothesis is that far off from the truth.  I'm going out on a limb by saying
this but I have nothing to gain or lose.

I can only tell you that for 35 years I've seen only people practicing holistic medicine...and as
the FDA gets stronger and the AMA gets louder, it's becoming more and more difficult to be
in the field of holistic medicine without the threat of big brother trying to get rid of you.  If
you watch the video that was shared on this website called "Cut, Poison, Burn", you will
understand this from a greater perspective.  You will see first hand how difficult it is to get
100% holistic care in this country right now without threatening the person's livelihood who is treating you.

If you've got some free time, don't miss this.
http://www.dadamo.com/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?m-1316873553/

If I were practicing in the field of complimentary or holistic medicine and didn't go along with the protocols and guidelines of the very powerful AMA and FDA, I would be very careful not to ever say that to my patients or to anyone...I would play along best I could because this is the
safest thing to do.  Not for the patient, necessarily, but the only way I can practice within the
guidelines that are out of my control.

I would use my own protocols and treat all patients with the same intention to heal... but don't think for a moment I wouldn't wish those other strong institutions would simply go away and
allow me to do what I know I do best without their interference.  Just can't be done...so, I would never share my personal beliefs or go against conventional protocols because it's a way to get sued and be put out of business.  The goal of some very powerful people is to use harsh treatment because it's
financially beneficial for so many institutions....drug companies, stock investors, doctors, hospitals and all the people who have something to gain by keeping down the real healers.

I believe it's rather a game that must be played according to the rules of the people who hold
the cards...

Very well put Chloe!!!  

he explains it all clearly in his cancer book

got the book from his health series?

I suggest you take out a copy at your nearest library

Dr D is all for prevention at a cellular level,
unfortunately many patients go see him, looking for help, once invaded
or having previously undergone chemo aggressive treatments

I have personally met many patients of his, all cancer survivors

Quoted from Mickey

Very well put Chloe!!!  

Indeed!!!

After watching my mother die from chemo and radiation. I will never have either. I know a lot of people who refused it and lived twice as long and even went into remission.  Nothing that makes your hair fall out is good for you, IMO. And radiation causes cancer. It's a known fact. What's wrong with that picture?  It's like killing a fly with a sledge hammer.  My friend's mother was diagnosed with colon cancer in her 80's I believe. They didn't tell her and she lived 5 more years.  Five! Most people die in one year after finding out.

well written..

You have not seen anything until you see UNDER OUR SKIN  .com a documentary that should have people out in the street.

and yet the world is silent while young people and babies suffer and die.  Worth seeing..

Then again - doing some cleanses and some juicing in advance of cancer, we all might be advised to learn how and why.. why wait until we are sick?

http://www.gerson.org/

This is just one site that advocates aggressive taking responsibility for our self... with food!!  and we have the advantage of doing it early..

I am in the process of really deciding that IF I developed cancer.. what would I do?  Mom had four surgeries for separate cancers with cobalt radiation at 29 and radiation at 90..  she lived a long life..  so there is some value.. but prevention would be so much smarter..

what exactly would you be willing to do?  go to Mexico and learn how to do whatever or stay close to home.. when asked seriously - then it is not a simple matter.. If we thought about it then we could do with FRESH foods what all the pills and potions try to do.. heal our body from many illnesses..

I mean if diabetics used to die in 3 years after the diagnosis, the today we are better of.. but what if juicing for minerals would prevent it in the first place?  what is the age in which you would be willing to make the extra effort?

For me my diet recently has reduced the ill effects of diabetes, and heart issues and prevented Alzheimer's maybe.. yet it will take on act of 'congress' to make it main stream.. and we know how much congress is under the thumb of big and bigger business..

I remember when American companies went abroad and introduced all their latest (cheaper) goods, bought up local company after company, and left a business desert in it's wake... sad and so much good hand me down knowledge lost.  Generations of families improved the material things while today there is no loyalty to anything but the 'branding'..  

I ask not who is, but where is John Galt?  Or is his name Norquist or Koch today?   Are they guilty or just a victim of not enough push back by you and me?

      





  

Quoted from Goldie

well written..

You have not seen anything until you see UNDER OUR SKIN  .com

and yet the world is silent while young people suffer and die.  Worth seing..

  

Wow movie looks interesting.  Years ago on an MTV show called The Real World ther was a girl named Irene who said she had Lyme's disease and this was the reason for all her problems.  She had to leave the Seattle house after everyone turned against her.  They more or less treated her like it was all in her head.

As for cancer treatment, it's not going to change in my lifetime.  Cancer is hereditary mostly I think.  I'm hoping to avoid.  

I believe the good doctor, will work with those taking chemo which isn't saying he is recommending it. I have read in one of the books that an A in late stages of cancer, which he helped to keep them strong for the treatments. My impression of that account was that at this point chemo may have been the last resort, from the patient and their families point of view. Seems like he works with the patient and their doctor if possible.

It is the patient who decides what their treatment is.

Chem saves lives! Period.

I find it strange as well. Dr. D should try to work with antineoplastons, not chemo.

Nonetheless, few people know more about cancer than Dr. D. There must be some merit to it--I suppose. Hard to think of any, considering the dreadful side effects.

Just my opinion, but Connecticut is an area with a lot of money, prestige and recognition.  If Dr D wants to keep practicing and maintain public respect, he can't be a fanatic.  People who are anti-mainstream cancer treatment are, whether we like it or not, seen as lunatics.

As the daughter of an oncologist for some cancers as Hodgkin's Lymphoma and child Leukemia, the results of the chemotherapy and allopathic treatment works very deep and well, plenty of long time survivors and with quality of life.
My mother had five years ago a cancer between colon and rectum and she is doing pretty well, for a 78 years lady with Alzheimer since 2002 before the cancer.
We consulted two good oncologists who confirmed our choice to have her treated just with surgery and no chemotherapy for her mind problems and anemia, which had made too difficult to treat her. May be the age itself justified this approach, but Alzheimer and anemia made it the only one.  If I had some months of life I 'd not undergo chemotherapy, if it 'd give me some healthy years with quality of life probably yes.
Common sense and to avoid therapeutic obstinacy when it is just a pain for the patient should rule.

The many cancer patients I spoke with did not  resent at all the treatment.

They can't be all stupid, Dr D is really wise in his approach too as ever

Quoted from Christopher1

I read he uses chemo, especially a LOT of chemo for teachers with cancer.

Seems like a primitive approach, and not in line with the Hippocratic Oath.

Thoughts?

Thanks for bringing this point up. I hadn't ever thought to discuss this important point.

Because in many instances, without it, people die unnecessarily.

Is that a ringing endorsement of modern oncology? No, but what do you propose instead to tell a kid with a pediatric leukemia that is highly treatable: to juice raw liver in take coffee enemas instead? Years ago I had a patient who had a stage three testicular cancer. This cancer is 100% curable with chemotherapy. His wife, a massage therapist, was pushing that he go 'completely natural.'   I politely explained that there were many, many options he could use to help control and optimize his results, but it would not be wise to forgo a treatment such as this, which was so reliably successful. They opted instead to do juice fasts and go elsewhere. Six months later they were back in my office, he riddled with metastasis, now taking that very same chemo to simply 'debulk' the cancer and help him survive a bit longer pain free.

Epic fail.

I'm currently monitoring two brain cancer cases who are bucking the odds for long-term survival. In both cases they received convention treatment plus a tailored regimen from me. I doubt if they had received only one or the other that they would be alive today, though I am certain that Gary Null and Joe Mercola would have told them that this was all a big mistake. Trouble is, where are these guys when the patient comes back with the recurrence. I can tell you they are no where in sight. That's when they send in the assistant to tell you that 'maybe it is time to do the chemotherapy.'

Antineoplastons work in a very small number of people. I've seen several patients on Bryzinski's treatment, with no concurrent chemotherapy, die. Movies are nice, but reality should also include what they don't tell you. People die on Gerson Therapy. Chemo is not the be-all and end-all and some people are going to die no matter what.

A primitive approach, IMHO, is to base your decision on broad sweeping conclusions drawn from consumer reading material that limits your ability to decide what is the right thing to do then and there.

My goals are quite simple: to get my patients from one side of the river over to the other. If I can do that with exclusively naturopathic modalities, so much the better. If in order to do that I need to combine modalities, well, that is part of the equation. If the only way that I would agree to ferry them across would be to require them to do only that which is acceptable to me I would not be much a ferryman, now would I?

Hopes, aesthetics and dreams are nice. I get up five days a week and deal with realities.

Big difference.

BTW, the Hippocratic notion of 'first do no harm' (primum non nocere) is not an accurate interpretation. It is more accurately, 'if at all possible, do no harm.' i.e it is a heuristic, not an algorithm. If it were a law then draining a abscess or giving a B12 injection would be a violation.

Dr D.. THANK YOU for the update.. I think you are on track to wellness all around.. I think the references to others is detracting but only as it gives them, and others, fodder for similar statements later and taking them out of context..

Like the Gersen suggestions of using juices to strengthen the body .. doing only juices will not help everyone for every thing, yet I do think that juicing vegetables is a good thing.  I am near certain that you would have no objection to vegetable juicing in support of better absorption of nutrients be that before and after chemo, with or without BTD.

Richard Bach who wrote 'Jonathan Seagull' wrote a small story of a man living in seclusion in a mountain cave.  He had visitors and they where stunned to see that he had developed the PERFECT religion.  They asked why it it not preached all over the world?  His answer:  Would you? (given the worlds people are always at war?).

That same premise follows all that we say here.. should we depend on BTD to the exclusions of other suggestions, start wars by exclusion of ideas or take the good and leave the rest?  I for instance juice green vegetables with beets and other foods according to the teachings of Dr Bernard Jensen and learned about vitamins and minerals from Adelle Davis and about the need for fat from Dr Atkins, and I leave off the grains and now add a little dairy again with my BTD-SWAMI, (not 'milk' as that would be to painful for me)  but quark works perfect in small amounts.. I eat BTD hardy no matter the amount, I leave vegetarians (by blood type) to their needs, but for me, please keep growing bulls and cows as they are a mainstay on my plate.  

I could NOT do that- leave others to their believes or needs- if it was not for BTD and the learning I do here.  But when I had pneumonia, and my insides where dried out to the point where nothing worked, then doing calema cleanses was the thing that healed me.  Dandelion juice for some is bitter and distasteful, (I love it) - when I drank a glass of it for 6 weeks, the liver (brown) spots on my hands visibly got lighter, and have never gotten worse.  When I drank peppermint tea for a few weeks - to replace coffee- my bladder relaxed to where I do not have to pee every 45 minutes, and my diabetes dropped all its numbers after adding a hormone for a few weeks...  

Yes there are many modalities, and in the words of Bach:  would you preach by exclusion?  

Words taken out of context are harmful, diets out of context are harmful, and food is not the end all.  Medicine has come along way.. some illnesses are near gone, diphtheria, polio, and many others.. yet other weakening of our immune system by micro organisms is happening in the fresh air. Bugs of all kinds are invading our body, and some will kill us the same as cancer might. Autism is a horror so is Lyme.. yet IF we at least fight them with our own TAKING RESPONSIBILITY for our food intake, then I do think we have a better chance at living - but not to the exclusion of medicine.   I see my doctor every two month, we talk, and we compare notes & test results and we both learn and if I need a script I can get it with the consult.  Without some anti this or that I would have been miserable over the years..      

Dr D ....thanks for the post above and tanks for all your writings.. IF only you 'have' time to do more.. to become a SAGE living to 130, not on a mountain top, but living amongst us in good health.. May your vegetarian food needs nourish and keep you and your family healthy for a carefree life that ends in old age sipping on (vegetable green) yogurt!       

All the best.  

Goldie that is all well and good, and thanks for the kind words and support.

I am discussing these things when applied to the exclusion of all else.

And the justifications for that exclusion are not science-based.

Other than that everyone can do what they want.

We all want better options than currently exist.

Can't think of anything worse than living to 130, unless I can figure out a way to take it easy a bit.

I think it is important to remember that people need options and should not be bound to a "one size fits all" approach.  If I were diagnosed with a type of cancer that was treatable and usually successful with chemo and/or radiation, I would definitely have the treatment and supplement with complimentary, alternative and holistic therapies.

In fact, many years ago I had the honor of being the chairperson of an AIDS fundraising campaign at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, which is one of the premier cancer centers in the world.  Back then, Dana Farber had instituted a policy of offering ALL cancer patients a menu of natural health care approaches such as nutritional counselling, acupuncture, massage, etc.  This practice is still in place today.  This, IMHO, is the best of both worlds.

Keep up the good work, Dr. D.

http://www.dana-farber.org/Adu.....ative-Therapies.aspx

Quoted from Gina

Chem saves lives! Period.

Perhaps a little more of an explanation of your thinking and less of the periods would be more useful

Very helpful explanation Dr D. Thanks, I have adjusted my thinking accordingly.

So much better when explained.

The trick is getting the right doctor! Perhaps there is a place for cloning

A Dr D in Every Capital City.

Quoted from policychecker

Very helpful explanation Dr D. Thanks, I have adjusted my thinking accordingly.

So much better when explained.

The trick is getting the right doctor! Perhaps there is a place for cloning

A Dr D in Every Capital City.

Totally agree. Thank you, Dr. D for your explanation. It really helps me to understand the issue a lot better.

How about a Dr D in every capital city of the world?  

It's so comforting to know that there are options and that thoughtful consideration of what works doesn't exclude any specific modality.
In 1996 I had a tiny thyroid cancer which was detected very early because I had a benign parathyroid adenoma which exhausted me.  I was very fortunate that after having both removed surgically, there was no sign of any spread and I didn't require any radiation or chemo.  I just take high levels of thyroid hormone to suppress any cells that might have been left behind.  I was fortunate enough to find ER4YT shortly thereafter.  Most of us are here because we've discovered that the one size fits all approach doesn't work.

Suzanne Somer's oncologist Julie Taguchi prescribes both the Wiley Protocol which is a bhrt hormone regimen that mimics hormone levels of a 25 year old... AND also does chemo.  She gives the WP to patients who had chemo and also uses Tamoxifen or whatever that drug is..... Point is, doctors use a wide range of treatments.  Why would Dr. D be any different?

I have been wrapped in Glory.. Dr D himself ... wow.. !   Yes in truth, the teachings I get from BTD is using foods to prevent damage, first and foremost.  When I eat compliant I have relatively NO pain so fewer pills, when I eat green juices I don't wash out all the mineral salts.  When I take meds for a while I am happy to know that food soon will be making me get over the side effects.  I tried sups and some longer then others, and yet I remember that Dr D has allowed for choices, here and on the outside, and even his protocols are only for a while..

I never saw (YOU) him be on one side or the other forfeiting judgment.  When I am going to be in trouble, some day, I will do whatever research I can and form on opinion.  Will it be right for me.. maybe.. would it be right for the next guy- hardly.. to each their own intelligence, and their own good or poor health care provider.  Yet Nature is best.  I drink coffee only for severe headaches. Avoid you say?! yes but so are aspirins.. so sometimes it's the lesser of whatever, sometimes is all I can afford.

The biggest transit I see here is that as knowledge grew - so did Dr D - and he was big enough and secure enough to change some entires in the latest book or in the on line Swami!  IT takes a wise person with great generosity willing to do that and to include so much of this or that.. saving us millions collectively!  Dr D. (you) did the research for us all.  

'Take the high road' my niece said the other day, take the high road, step out of the swamp, fencing is only good with foils and full mask for safety.  As for defending.. others will do it gladly.. and...

.... in the mean time I am 'up' like a puffin .. collecting wise words, meanings and intentions 'spoken' in type by Dr D!    May gosh - if ever he makes a type - the world will jump all over him.. falling flat.   


    

Quoted from Dr. D

I'm currently monitoring two brain cancer cases who are bucking the odds for long-term survival. In both cases they received convention treatment plus a tailored regimen from me. I doubt if they had received only one or the other that they would be alive today,

I'm wondering the age of these patients Dr. D? My mother was diagnosed at 78. The oncologist gave her one year. She lasted a year and a 1/2.  They all said her age was the main factor of her mortality.  I actually tried to get her to come see you and she refused, having never been to a ND before. (Go NJ with your MD's   )

I really appreciated reading Dr D's reply.  

Though I have a hard time trusting the allopathic approach most of the time because they are not willing to even consider any other alternatives, it's nice to know that there are some practitioners out there that are not so blinkered and are willing to consider all options for the good of the patient.