|
|
楼主 |
发表于 2009-9-2 11:26:50
|
显示全部楼层
来自： 中国浙江绍兴
Originally published in February 2003 icon
Alternatives to Chemotherapy ~ Are there safer ways of killing cancer cells?
Are There Safer Ways of Killing Cancer Cells?
Conventional oncology largely uses chemotherapy to destroy cancer cells.
There can be no doubt that chemotherapy works, and that in every cancer case, cancer cells need destroying.
Chemotherapy is backed by high quality clinical trials and has been studied extensively for nearly 40 years.
Practically every known solid tumour has a solid evidence base and the oncologist will be able to give you a pretty accurate percentage success rate for any particular treatment regime, in any particular solid cancer. However, clearly, chemotherapy has a downside as it is a highly toxic treatment and in many patients is poorly tolerated. There are studies in conventional oncology literature implying that a significant number of patients can die of chemotherapy, as opposed to the cancer.
A play on BBC2, called WIT, enacted a harrowing story about an English Professor dying of cancer. The heroine was brilliantly acted by Emma Thompson. The dramatic high point came when the heroine said to camera:
"It's not the Cancer that's killing me; It's the treatment""
"Everyone in medicine understands that a great deal of uncertainty about what to do for people, will always remain in any illness. Human disease and lives are too complicated for reality to be otherwise". This is taken from a recent book by Atul Gawande entitled "Complications: A Surgeon's Notes on an Imperfect Science".
Cancer is just such a complex illness. Current medicine is evidence based as outlined earlier in this article. However, what happens if you do not wish to have a conventional treatment such as chemotherapy? Are there alternatives? Yes, there are, but they currently have a poor evidence base, and are never likely to have the quality of evidence base which backs chemotherapy. Providing the cancer sufferer knows what the evidence is, then they can make treatment choices on an informed consent basis. In my view, it's unethical for patients to be offered any treatment with a less good evidence base than chemotherapy, other than on an informed consent basis.
High dose intravenous vitamin C is one of these treatments, and we use it extensively in our clinic. It is one of our most effective treatments.
Clearly, because of the poor evidence base, we largely see chemotherapy and radiotherapy failures, but interestingly enough, those patients who deliberately seek us out and wish to try these approaches as a first line option, tend to be the "more well informed" public, and these include some doctors, which is indeed a curious situation.
Vitamin C (ascorbic acid) is a major water-soluble antioxidant with a variety of biological functions. It may be important in maintaining proper immune cell function. Even though vitamin C commonly functions as an antioxidant, it can also act as a pro-oxidant, that is actually oxidising tissues, which is what chemotherapy does.
Vitamin C converts free radicals into hydrogen peroxide, a molecule that can damage cell membranes if not neutralised by an enzyme inside the cell called catalase.
Tumour cells have 10-1 00 times less catalase than normal cells, and are therefore more sensitive than normal to hydrogen peroxide. Vitamin C accumulates in solid tumours at concentrations higher than those in surrounding normal tissue. The accumulation of vitamin C preferentially in cancer tissues has raised concerns that vitamin C may provide tumours with anti-oxidant protection from chemotherapeutic agents. In practice therefore, the avoidance of vitamin C and indeed all antioxidants, when going through a chemotherapy programme, is important.
To obtain vitamin C at pro-oxidant levels, at which it destroys cancer cells, is only achievable by intravenous infusion.
Plasma levels of vitamin C between 300-400 milligrams per 100cc are required in order to kill significant numbers of cancer cells. This requires intravenous infusions of 75 grams of vitamin C, (in some cases less, depending on the size of the patient and the tumour cell mass), infused intravenously on a daily basis for three weeks in order to be able to attain these plasma levels. It's important to realise that the highest plasma level of vitamin C achievable in humans using oral supplementation is 4.5 milligrams per 100cc.
Many studies have been done on this approach in the laboratory and Phase I and Phase II clinical trials have been completed on this approach. (Phase II clinical trials have been carried out in Nebraska, USA and are about to be published). Phase III clinical studies are in discussion.
Our most common protocol is the use of 75 grams of vitamin C, in sterile water, with a number of minerals, particularly magnesium, zinc, chromium, selenium, B12 and some B vitamins.
The patient is infused over 2.5 hours daily for 3 weeks (excluding weekends). The vitamin C level at the end of the infusion course is tested and if this is sufficiently high then some significant tumour kill has happened. If it isn't, then this regime may have to be repeated.
The advantage of using this approach is that it doesn't carry the downsides of chemotherapy, and can be repeated many times.
The main downside is that if we are working with patients who have fluid accumulation in the chest, say from a lung cancer, or in the abdomen, say from ovarian cancer, then the fluid load that these intravenous infusions involve can make the situation worse. So in those patients we choose other safe options to kill cancer cells.
Concurrently with the high dose intravenous vitamin C, we use supplements, the most important of which is lipoic acid.
Lipoic acid has been found to enhance the cancer killing effect of vitamin C, and the mechanism for this is unknown.
The only side effect we see in this treatment is tiredness due to tumour cell death, as well as increased fluid accumulation in particular groups of patients, as mentioned above.
So in conclusion, even though chemotherapy has such a high quality evidence base, it doesn't mean that other, less well-researched treatments do not also work.
Dr Julian Kenyon
Dr Julian Kenyon (Medical Director)
The Dove Clinic for Integrated Medicine, London & Winchester.
Dr Julian Kenyon started life as an academic surgeon then, soon after the cultural revolution, went to China, having been fascinated by traditional Chinese medicine.
On his return he founded the British Medical Acupuncture Society.
He is founder president of the British Society of Integrated Medicine and Medical Director of the Dove Clinic of Integrated Medicine, London and Winchester.
His main clinical interests are complex illnesses, particularly chronic fatigue syndrome, and cancer.
翻译软件翻译：
最初发表于2003年2月图标
替代化疗〜是否有杀死癌细胞的更安全的方式？
是否有杀死癌细胞的更安全的方式？
主要是利用常规肿瘤化疗摧毁癌细胞。
不可能有任何疑问，化疗的作品，并在每一个癌症的情况下，需要摧毁癌细胞。
化疗是支持高品质的临床试验和研究了近40年广泛。
几乎所有的已知实体瘤具有坚实的证据基础和肿瘤学家可以给你一个非常准确率为任何特定的治疗方案的成功率在任何特定实体癌。但是，显然，化疗有一个缺点，因为它是一种剧毒的待遇，而且在许多病人的耐受性很差。有文学传统肿瘤研究暗示，一个相当多的患者可以死于化疗，而不是癌症。
关于BBC2发挥，呼吁改善小组，制定了有关的英语教授，死于癌症的悲惨故事。出色的女主人公是采取行动埃玛汤普森。高点的急剧正值女主人公说相机：
“这不是癌症的杀死我，这是治疗”“
“在医学上每个人都明白，在做什么人们很大的不确定性，将永远留在任何疾病。人类疾病和生命太复杂的现实，否则将”。这是由一个由Atul Gawande最近出版的题为“并发症：一个外科医生的债券在非理想的科学”。
癌症是这样一个复杂的疾病。目前的医学证据显示，在所列本文前面的基础。然而，会发生什么，如果你不希望有这样一个传统的化疗治疗？是否有办法？是的，有，但他们目前的证据基础差，并且永不可能有证据的基础，支撑化疗质量。癌症患者提供了知道什么证据，那么他们可以在知情同意的基础治疗选择。我认为，这是不道德的患者提供了比化疗不太好的证据的基础，除了在知情同意的基础上其他任何治疗。
大剂量静脉注射维生素C是这些治疗手段之一，并利用它在我们的临床广泛。这是我们最有效的治疗手段之一。
显然，由于恶劣的证据基础，我们主要看到化疗和放疗的失败，但有趣的是，谁的病人刻意要我们出去，并希望尝试，作为第一线选择这些办法，往往是“更充分了解”公共，这些包括一些医生，这确实是一个奇怪的局面。
维生素C（抗坏血酸）是一个重要的水生物具有多种功能的水溶性抗氧化剂。这可能是重要的免疫细胞维持正常功能。尽管维生素C，经常作为一种抗氧化剂的功能，它也可以作为亲氧化剂，这实际上是氧化性组织，这正是化疗一样。
维生素C转化为过氧化氢的分子，能够破坏细胞膜，如果不是由细胞内的过氧化氢酶的瓦解称为自由基。
肿瘤细胞具有10月1日00倍不到正常细胞过氧化氢酶，因此超过正常的过氧化氢敏感。维生素C积累的浓度高于周围正常组织为高，在实体肿瘤。维生素C的优先在癌组织中，已引起关注，维生素C可以提供抗肿瘤，化疗药物的氧化剂，从保护的积累。因此，在实践中的维生素C和实际上所有的抗氧化剂，避免外出时通过一个化疗方案，是重要的。
要获取维生素的亲氧化剂水平荤，它在摧毁癌细胞，只有通过静脉滴注实现。
血浆维生素C水平之间的300-400毫克每100cc需要以杀死癌细胞的大量。这需要75克维生素C静脉注射，（在某些情况下减少，根据病人的规模和质量的肿瘤细胞），注入每天静脉注射3周，以便能够实现这些血浆。重要的是要意识到，维生素C在人类实现使用口服补充是4.5毫克每100cc最高血浆水平。
许多研究已经做了这个在实验室和一期和二期临床试验的方法已在这个方法完成。 （第二期临床试验已经进行了内布拉斯加州，美国和即将出版）。第三阶段临床研究进行讨论。
我们最常见的协议是75克的维生素C使用，无菌水，与一些矿物质，尤其是镁，锌，铬，硒，维生素B12和一些维生素B。
注入病人是每天2.5小时以上为3周（不包括周末）。在维生素C在输液课程结束时的水平进行测试，如果这是相当高，然后杀死一些重大的肿瘤发生。如果不是，那么这一制度可能要重复。
使用这种方法的优点是它不进行化疗的缺点，而且可以重复多次。
主要缺点是，如果我们是与病人谁的胸部有积水的工作，从肺癌，或在腹部说，说从卵巢癌，那么这些液体负荷涉及静脉注射可以使情况变得更糟。因此，在这些患者，我们选择其他安全选项以杀死癌细胞。
与高剂量静脉注射维生素C的同时，我们使用的补充，其中最重要的是硫辛酸。
硫辛酸已经发现，以提高癌症死亡的维生素C的效果，而且因为这是未知的机制。
唯一的副作用，我们看到了这种治疗方法是由于疲劳肿瘤细胞死亡，并增加患者特定群体积水，如上所述。
总括而言，尽管化疗有如此高品质的证据基础，但这并不意味着其他，不注重研究的治疗方法不同时工作。
凯尼恩朱利安博士
朱利安博士凯尼恩（医务总监）
对于中西医结合，伦敦和温彻斯特鸽诊所。
凯尼恩开始朱利安博士作为学术外科医生当时的生活后不久，文化革命，到中国后，被中医着迷。
他返回，他创立了英国医学针灸学会。
他创办的综合医学和医学鸽中西医结合主任，伦敦和英国的温切斯特诊所学会会长。
他的主要临床利益的复杂疾病，特别是慢性疲劳综合症和癌症。 |
|
IP卡
狗仔卡
显身卡
发表于 2012-6-10 21:58:56
