F.A.C.T. – Just the Facts

by Dr. Garry F. Gordon, MD, DO, MD(H)
Gordon Research Institute

Cancer Screening Tests: More Harm Than Good?

There has been a lot of discussion recently about whether to change the names of certain types of cancer-related conditions, to ease people’s fears about following less aggressive therapies.
Thus patients hearing the word cancer are too inclined to undertake needless aggressive treatment including surgery, chemo, and/or radiation.

Officials at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) state that overdiagnosis of cancer is a “major public health concern and a priority of the agency.” The agency director, Dr. Harold Varmus, says that many findings on mammography, PSA tests, and other cancer screens are not always malignancies, in the classical sense that they will kill you. But as soon as some hear the word cancer, they fear the worst and immediately think of surgery and chemo or radiation, when they might not even need it.

It’s a tough situation, knowing when to use the most aggressive forms of treatment; as Dr. Norton, medical director at Sloan-Kettering, says, many doctors opt for the more aggressive therapies because they cannot tell patients with certainty which cancers are slow growing, which will or will not progress, and which will kill them. One of the most overdiagnosed conditions that often results in surgery is ductal carcinoma in situ, but according to Dr. Esserman, professor at UCSF, it’s not even a “cancer,” so why are we calling it that?

If we change the name, or simply remove the word cancer from a diagnosis – as was done in the past with early-stage urinary tract lesions renamed “papillary urothelial neoplasia of low malignant potential,” or when in the past a particular change on pap smears was reclassified to a “low-grade lesion” – people are not as frightened and are more willing to submit to observation or watchful waiting.

I strongly believe that early cancer-screening tests are an invaluable tool in fight to eliminate cancer. But some strong voices are calling for less screening, and I believe that they are right if we fail to adopt the current research that clearly proves that cancer is a metabolic disease, as the book by Thomas Seyfried, PhD, reveals. If you choose to review his text and carefully consider the hundreds of references he supplies, I believe that many will agree with me that we need to change our approach to treating cancer. Doing so will largely eliminate the stress and fear that the word has engendered in the public.

People will soon realize that it is nonsense to spend $100,000 or more just to “live” an additional month. I can assure you that in my 56 years of practice, virtually any unapproved cancer treatment anywhere can beat the results that Big Pharma is getting in gouging the American public with its “approved” cancer treatments. If people were aware of the fact that if you already have metastatic cancer by the time you become concerned enough to consult a physician, and are in an “approved” medical facility in the US, your published chance of a 5-year survival is invariably well under 5%. Once people learn that fact, then I believe there will be a demand to offer the advanced early cancer screening tests available today, and the talk about discontinuing cancer screening tests will be seen as it really is: another scare tactic in trying to maintain the status quo a little longer for the failing conventional approaches.

The problem is not what we call the abnormal test result, whether or not it contains the word cancer in it; the issue is to change what mainstream medicine advises patients to do about abnormal test results. In order to provide a true informed consent, it is necessary to mention that in some instances, left untreated, their abnormal test result may lead to the development of clinical cancer, where there will be a detectable lump or bump – which is the unsophisticated, failing approach to managing cancer that we have relied on now for far too long. I have had extensive experience with most forms of cancer testing. I’ve studied radiology, and later I became involved with thermography. Most importantly, I have worked with simple blood tests that are now increasingly available around the world and are able to detect cancer years before the clinical lump or bump stage of cancer has developed.

An excellent, inexpensive test that I have used for many years now, offered through American Metabolic Labs, is called the CaProfile test and costs less than $500. This test has not failed to catch any and all cancer related lesions in their earliest and more curable stages. The CaProfile panel includes the PHI test (phosphohexose isomerase), which reflects the levels of anaerobic metabolites in the body, along with ultrasensitive HCG done three different ways. I have had a Mayo Clinic test wherein my patient’s HCG value was negative, but due to a suspicious thermograph result, I then repeated the test using the CaProfile.net test the very next week and found that it was really elevated using their special techniques. There is another test that has been developed at Purdue called the ONCOblot test (oncoblotlabs.com), and this test is believed to find every cancer but not until it is on average 2-plus mm in size. That makes the CaProfile test clearly more sensitive. Even so, the value of all of these tests is that by finding these elevated levels, they help patients begin to take their health more seriously, motivating them to make the necessary changes in diet and environment.

Dr. Tsuneo Kobayashi in Tokyo did a multiyear study involving thousands of subjects which clearly showed that annual testing in an asymptomatic population could be used to motivate subjects to follow simple health-promoting strategies that can virtually eliminate all cancers! It made no difference what gene testing revealed, or how many family members had cancer. In all cases, the extensive $500 panel of blood tests accurately identified those whose total body burden of cancer was becoming increased. Then following through with simple strategies including daily exercise, diet change, elimination of sugar and smoking, and detoxification with FIR sauna and herbal immune support (initiated long before the detectable lump stage of cancer had developed) permitted the cancer–screening test abnormalities to revert to safe, healthy levels. The Kobayashi study data prove that early sensitive cancer marker testing is a valuable tool that can help get the body back to safe levels every time, regardless of family history or having a gene such as BRCA or the gastric carcinoma gene. Once we have the early cancer panel indicating some marginal results, we can motivate the patient not to try removing tissues or using chemo but to focus more on the problem, by using my FIGHT Program. We might find that there are mercury issues in the mouth or other toxic exposures or excessive stress, parasites, sleep apnea, and so on, that can be leading to respiratory insufficiency, anaerobic metabolism, low membrane potential, or low ATP levels.

I have tried to help in every way possible to spread the message about the exciting proof that using early cancer screening tests, in combination with a wellness promoting program, could almost eliminate most all cancers. I am certain the current attacks regarding the value of cancer screening tests are because the tests being used are not those I am advocating, and the approaches being used to deal with abnormal results are too invasive and totally ignore the power of the body to heal itself given the support it needs.

Here are a few examples of questions and additional alternative protocols, as discussed by our F.A.C.T. forum participants (names and responses redacted to protect member confidentiality).

Q: Breast lobular carcinoma in-situ?

Hello, I have a 40-year-old female friend who was just diagnosed with right breast lobular carcinoma in-situ via biopsy. She is otherwise healthy and would like to avoid mastectomy and chemo meds. What do you suggest she do in order to successfully avoid this process and prevent full-blown cancer? She is very open to nutritional therapy and supplementation. Please keep in mind that money is an issue for her, although she is willing to find a physician in the Philadelphia area who can support her on her journey to greater health.
Thank you ~ R. S.

A1. Dear R. S.
First, let’s understand that LCIS, like DCIS (Ductal Carcinoma in-situ), is NOT a true Cancer. It is just a pre-cancer condition and, as such, these patients do NOT NEED radical surgery, chemo, or radiation.
LCIS Defined (Mayo Clinic): Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) is an uncommon condition in which abnormal cells form in the lobules or milk glands in the breast. LCIS isn’t cancer. But being diagnosed with LCIS indicates that you have an increased risk of developing breast cancer. LCIS usually doesn’t show up on mammograms. The condition is most often discovered as a result of a biopsy done for another reason, such as a suspicious breast lump or an abnormal mammogram.
My suggestion is to get a baseline breast thermograph now, and then another in 6 months, and if all is clear just repeat thermograph annually after that for monitoring. Do not use MAMMOGRAMS! I also suggest these patients to have an annual cancer screening blood test, with a company like American Metabolic Labs in Hollywood, Florida. If the test shows a little too much cancer developing in the body, we know to add more immune enhancing and detoxification steps to their basic program. For more info on AM Labs Caprofile screen, visit www.americanmetaboliclaboratories.net.

A2: May I suggest your patient review the information on www.thenewmedicine.info, where she will find an enormous amount of information about the causes and management of breast cancer. ~P. K.

A3: Dear R.S, you may consider “Lifeone” cancer therapy, which is an all natural approach that heals malignancies. ~D. J.

A4: I would recommend that she, and you, and indeed all of The Group, read Tom Tam’s books, especially Tong Ren Therapy: Beyond Acupuncture and Tong Ren for Cancer. I wish I had known about it 20 plus years ago when I was faced with Stage IIB breast cancer with 10/32 positive lymph nodes. Since those days I have followed alternative approaches with great interest (Indeed I did well over 30 alternative modalities from diet to healers and shamans to nutrients to sound and more.) He feels that breast cancer is one of the easiest to treat, so given its prevalence we all need to learn about his approach. It is painless, non-toxic, and can be combined with diet and other nutritional approaches, or used along with mainstream therapies. After reading his books she might like to consult with him since he is close–in Boston. Best regards. asw

A5: Cancer Treatment Centers of America is has a location in Philadelphia. They use a team approach that may be useful. http://www.cancercenter.com/ Phone: 888-712-2165. In 1996 I cured a breast lump on my left breast the size of an egg using a low complete protein diet and calcium carbonate, 2 TUMS, dissolved on the roof of my mouth daily. The diet also contained other nutrients now known to combat cancer. The lump became a dent. A mammogram six years later showed no sign of cancer. ~L. M.

A6: R. S, It would be helpful if HER2 and estrogen receptors were done at the time of biopsy, I would recommend doing her urinary estrogen metabolites to see whether her metabolic profile is anti- or procancerous. Also do her estrogen and progesterone levels, Exclude heavy metals/underlying infections e.g. candida/periodontal disease as well as root canals. There are specific IV protocols. Her immune system function needs looking at—including giving her Low dose naltrexone and Metformin to kills breast stem cells that caused initial cancer growth. High dose enzymes + B17 ( apricot kernels ) and diet and water consumption around keeping body alkaline. There are a host of supplements that are anti-cancerous e.g., green tea extract/turmeric or curcumin/quercetin/betulinic acid—if you want the whole enchilada, you will need to e-mail me. Diet—stay away from inflammatory foods/sugar/ refined carbs, and include asparagus (glutathione) , raspberries (ellagic acid), apple skins (in juicing – break down catechin bridges between cancer cells and rind of citrus esp light skinned (limonene). ~G.A.

A7: I recommend obtaining a report from Cancer Decisions by Ralph Moss, PhD. It has the most up to date info for every type of cancer. ~M. L.

The Gordon Research Institute’s F.A.C.T. forum is a dynamic online community of health-care practitioners who include physicians, dentists, chiropractors, nurses, dieticians, psychologists, physical therapists and many others licensed within the health-care field. The F.A.C.T. group, or “Forum for Anti-aging and Chelation Therapies,” originated as a way to help doctors learn about and facilitate the use of the latest alternative therapies and nutritional supplement protocols in managing their patients.

Over the years, F.A.C.T. has grown to a membership of over 4000 practitioners from 68 countries around the world. F.A.C.T. membership is free to qualified practitioners, and as members, they can discreetly consult on and discuss cases with one another, learn about new treatments and protocols, share their success stories, and gain access to an extensive catalog of information gathered from 55 years of ongoing research, conferences, and lectures on the latest developments in natural and alternative health.

For more information about F.A.C.T. and how to apply for free membership, visit the Gordon Research Institute web site at www.gordonresearch.com.