Guest guest Posted September 23, 2009 Report Share Posted September 23, 2009 LDN stands for "low dose naltrexone", which is a chemotherapy type agent with less side effects than most and which some people have reported to have some benefits against cancer, though usually in the form of tumor reduction or slowing down the progression of the cancer rather than eliminating. One such cancer where it has been reported to be beneficial is pancreatic cancer. Now, regarding Budwig - I consider the Budwig protocol, especially the flaxseed and quark (or cottage cheese or perhaps yogurt made from raw organic goat's milk) to be an especially effective cancer fighter and that is why I highly recommend it as part of my overall suggested anti-cancer protocol. Having said that, the success rates for Budwig by itself, similar to the success rates for Essiac Tea, are not what they once were and neither are they as great as has often been advertised. The claimed success rates of 90% and above are more likely less than 70% in my estimation. I believe that is because cancer is getting harder to beat and avoid in a world which is becoming increasingly toxic at the same time that our foods are becoming increasingly less nutritious. I still believe that Budwig is highly valuable and still recommend it. However, I would not recommend anyone going into battle against a deadly opponent with just one bullet in their gun, and I find it irksome to see some people recommend doing just that. BTW, much as I respect Dr. Budwig, when I first read about her she was called the "five-time Nobel Prize nominee" and since then it grew to first six and then seven nominations. Nobel nominations remain private for 50 years, so it is really hard to verify. Plus, nominations can come rather easily. Being nominated seven times would surely be quite an accomplishment, but it would also mean losing out seven time. It's kind of like saying the Buffalo Bills have been to four super bowls, which is true. It is also true that they never came away with the prize, and the mere fact or allegation of being nominated does not indicate at all how far the nominee made it in the actual awards process. All the best, oleander soup , "hologrammy2002" <micfo07 wrote:>> First of all,> what is LDN?> > Second, i can understand what you guys are saying about the budwig> forum(have been researching it for a month).> But i think its mostly due to the fact that Dr budwig> said most supplements and antioxidants in particular,> can reduce the healing benefits of the protocol.> > I think many people there just figure that this 7 time nominated> prize nobel dr has had really high healing rate, and thus,> they figure they should follow the protocol as much to the letter> as possible, why change what worked so well.> > But i understand both sides.> > Olivier> > oleander soup , "fishsalmon2001" cathykush@ wrote:> >> > They do allow discussion of OPC and certain herbs/supplements. And as> > I recall some of the testimonies included budwig as part of an overall> > protocol, and others were just following only budwig.> > > > Any protocol that helps anyone reverse their cancer is good and I say> > hallelujah! > > > > My objection was to the threatening sidemail. oh brother.... > > > > oleander soup , "jrrjim" <jim.mcelroy10@> wrote:> > >> > > I've had the same problems. I just don't post there anymore, although > > > I do occasionally go over and read some posts.> > > > > > They act scared. Like the slightest deviation from their protocol will > > > bring sickness raining down on them. I feel sorry for them. Of > > > course, they may feel sorry for me! Who knows. > > > > > > To play devil's advocate, the one thing that does intrigue me is the > > > high number of success stories they post. The mod over there claims > > > they has 16 successes in 2008 alone reported to the group. She was > > > duking it out with me and some others on another board, and she pulled > > > that number out, and said that no other board could claim 16 successes > > > in the last year. I couldn't argue with that! So there's a part of me > > > that still is intrigued by "Budwig pure". But they do act like > > > religious zealots, that's for sure!> > > > > > oleander soup , "fishsalmon2001" <cathykush@> > > > wrote:> > > >> > > > You're right Tony.A number of months ago I posted something on their> > > > board to someone desperately looking for help with pancreatic cancer.> > > > I posted a response indicating the good results LDN had with this> > > > particular cancer (in addition to a good plan which included Budwig).> > > >> > >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2009 Report Share Posted September 23, 2009 Tony, I respect your knowledge base a great deal but LDN is not at all a chemotherapy type of drug. Naltrexone was/is used in the addictions field for many years, mainly for opioid related addictions. It interferes with the serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Dr. Bert Berkson is one of the world's leading authorities on using LDN with Alpha Lipoic Acid to control a number of diseases including some cancers. I have a good friend in Scotland who became part of his first clinical trial. She was given 6 months three years ago for lung cancer and she is still going strong. LDN is a very watered down dose which is taken at bedtime and is only active in the body for four hours. The explaination for its action is well described through it is beyond me to give that information here. I have an extensive amount of information on LDN but the place to start would be listening to Berkson : http://glasgowldn2009.com/category/conference-sessions/ Just scroll down to his presentation. Cheryl oleander soup , "" wrote: > > > LDN stands for " low dose naltrexone " , which is a chemotherapy type agent > with less side effects than most and which some people have reported to > have some benefits against cancer, though usually in the form of tumor > reduction or slowing down the progression of the cancer rather than > eliminating. One such cancer where it has been reported to be > beneficial is pancreatic cancer. > > Now, regarding Budwig - I consider the Budwig protocol, especially the > flaxseed and quark (or cottage cheese or perhaps yogurt made from raw > organic goat's milk) to be an especially effective cancer fighter and > that is why I highly recommend it as part of my overall suggested > anti-cancer protocol. > > Having said that, the success rates for Budwig by itself, similar to the > success rates for Essiac Tea, are not what they once were and neither > are they as great as has often been advertised. The claimed success > rates of 90% and above are more likely less than 70% in my estimation. > I believe that is because cancer is getting harder to beat and avoid in > a world which is becoming increasingly toxic at the same time that our > foods are becoming increasingly less nutritious. > > I still believe that Budwig is highly valuable and still recommend it. > However, I would not recommend anyone going into battle against a deadly > opponent with just one bullet in their gun, and I find it irksome to see > some people recommend doing just that. > > BTW, much as I respect Dr. Budwig, when I first read about her she was > called the " five-time Nobel Prize nominee " and since then it grew to > first six and then seven nominations. Nobel nominations remain private > for 50 years, so it is really hard to verify. Plus, nominations can > come rather easily. > > Being nominated seven times would surely be quite an accomplishment, but > it would also mean losing out seven time. It's kind of like saying the > Buffalo Bills have been to four super bowls, which is true. It is also > true that they never came away with the prize, and the mere fact or > allegation of being nominated does not indicate at all how far the > nominee made it in the actual awards process. > > All the best, > > > > oleander soup , " hologrammy2002 " <micfo07@> > wrote: > > > > First of all, > > what is LDN? > > > > Second, i can understand what you guys are saying about the budwig > > forum(have been researching it for a month). > > But i think its mostly due to the fact that Dr budwig > > said most supplements and antioxidants in particular, > > can reduce the healing benefits of the protocol. > > > > I think many people there just figure that this 7 time nominated > > prize nobel dr has had really high healing rate, and thus, > > they figure they should follow the protocol as much to the letter > > as possible, why change what worked so well. > > > > But i understand both sides. > > > > Olivier > > > > oleander soup , " fishsalmon2001 " cathykush@ > wrote: > > > > > > They do allow discussion of OPC and certain herbs/supplements. And > as > > > I recall some of the testimonies included budwig as part of an > overall > > > protocol, and others were just following only budwig. > > > > > > Any protocol that helps anyone reverse their cancer is good and I > say > > > hallelujah! > > > > > > My objection was to the threatening sidemail. oh brother.... > > > > > > oleander soup , " jrrjim " <jim.mcelroy10@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > I've had the same problems. I just don't post there anymore, > although > > > > I do occasionally go over and read some posts. > > > > > > > > They act scared. Like the slightest deviation from their protocol > will > > > > bring sickness raining down on them. I feel sorry for them. Of > > > > course, they may feel sorry for me! Who knows. > > > > > > > > To play devil's advocate, the one thing that does intrigue me is > the > > > > high number of success stories they post. The mod over there > claims > > > > they has 16 successes in 2008 alone reported to the group. She was > > > > duking it out with me and some others on another board, and she > pulled > > > > that number out, and said that no other board could claim 16 > successes > > > > in the last year. I couldn't argue with that! So there's a part of > me > > > > that still is intrigued by " Budwig pure " . But they do act like > > > > religious zealots, that's for sure! > > > > > > > > oleander soup , " fishsalmon2001 " <cathykush@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > You're right Tony.A number of months ago I posted something on > their > > > > > board to someone desperately looking for help with pancreatic > cancer. > > > > > I posted a response indicating the good results LDN had with > this > > > > > particular cancer (in addition to a good plan which included > Budwig). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2009 Report Share Posted September 23, 2009 Cheryl - Perhaps I should have been a bit more expansive in my answer, which I posted in the wee hours after another long day, and we wouldn't be differing over semantics. Although LDN is not considered to be a classic chemotherapy drug in most cancer circles, I used the classic Princeton definition of chemotherapy as being "chemical agents used in the treatment of diseases or mental illness", and I further refine that to be "man-made chemical agents used to treat the specific disease of cancer". Naltrexone fits that definition; but in all fairness I probably should not call it a chemotherapy drug because it is much less dangerous than standard chemo drugs, does not appear to significantly harm health cells, and in many instances is more effective too. I am actually quite familiar with Naltrexone - as a self-described cancer researcher I would be remiss not to know about it. It was originally developed to treat drug addiction due to being an opiate blocker. Its use was later expanded to treat alcoholism as well and in recent years it has been used with considerable success against cancer, primarily to retard tumor growth. For cancer, the typical dose is about 1/10th that used to treat alcoholism and its side effects are generally mild. I like it, though I would never recommend it as a sole treatment for cancer because it does nothing to address the root causes or to prevent the return of cancer like a comprehensive protocol and lifestyle change can do. It would make a good addition to such a protocol for some people though, and I have actually at times considered adding it to my recommended protocol. Thanks for the links, btw. I have not seen the Burt Berkson presentations yet, but he is a doctor that I have the utmost respect for and I often refer to his clinical study against liver disease which successfully used three common anti-oxidants (milk thistle, alpha lipoic acid and selenium) along with some changes in diet and lifestyle to reverase liver damage in three out of three women who were facing either transplants or the horrors of interferon. /berkson.htm The study, which has been on my website for years, was never published in the United States. Do you think that might be because liver transplants and interferon treatments are hugely profitable while common anti-oxidants and lifestyle and dietary advice are not? There is a disease which has infected and permeated the mainstream medical establishment that is far more injurious to mankind than any of the diseases they attempt to treat, It's name is "greed". All the best, Tony oleander soup , "Cheryl" <cheryl.s.campbell wrote:>> Tony, I respect your knowledge base a great deal but LDN is not at all a chemotherapy type of drug. Naltrexone was/is used in the addictions field for many years, mainly for opioid related addictions. It interferes with the serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Dr. Bert Berkson is one of the world's leading authorities on using LDN with Alpha Lipoic Acid to control a number of diseases including some cancers. I have a good friend in Scotland who became part of his first clinical trial. She was given 6 months three years ago for lung cancer and she is still going strong. LDN is a very watered down dose which is taken at bedtime and is only active in the body for four hours. The explaination for its action is well described through it is beyond me to give that information here. I have an extensive amount of information on LDN but the place to start would be listening to Berkson : http://glasgowldn2009.com/category/conference-sessions/> > Just scroll down to his presentation.> Cheryl> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2009 Report Share Posted September 23, 2009 Thanks for your excellent response Tony! I'm sure you get tired of answering questions I know I would and it is totally understandable that you used chemotherapy in that context. Couldn't agree with you more on the greed factor. I've seen it close up and personal since I was diagnosed. Cheryl oleander soup , "" wrote: > > > Cheryl - > > Perhaps I should have been a bit more expansive in my answer, which I > posted in the wee hours after another long day, and we wouldn't be > differing over semantics. Although LDN is not considered to be a > classic chemotherapy drug in most cancer circles, I used the classic > Princeton definition of chemotherapy as being " chemical agents used in > the treatment of diseases or mental illness " , and I further refine that > to be " man-made chemical agents used to treat the specific disease of > cancer " . > > Naltrexone fits that definition; but in all fairness I probably should > not call it a chemotherapy drug because it is much less dangerous than > standard chemo drugs, does not appear to significantly harm health > cells, and in many instances is more effective too. > > I am actually quite familiar with Naltrexone - as a self-described > cancer researcher I would be remiss not to know about it. It was > originally developed to treat drug addiction due to being an opiate > blocker. Its use was later expanded to treat alcoholism as well and in > recent years it has been used with considerable success against cancer, > primarily to retard tumor growth. > > For cancer, the typical dose is about 1/10th that used to treat > alcoholism and its side effects are generally mild. I like it, though I > would never recommend it as a sole treatment for cancer because it does > nothing to address the root causes or to prevent the return of cancer > like a comprehensive protocol and lifestyle change can do. It would > make a good addition to such a protocol for some people though, and I > have actually at times considered adding it to my recommended protocol. > > Thanks for the links, btw. I have not seen the Burt Berkson > presentations yet, but he is a doctor that I have the utmost respect for > and I often refer to his clinical study against liver disease which > successfully used three common anti-oxidants (milk thistle, alpha lipoic > acid and selenium) along with some changes in diet and lifestyle to > reverase liver damage in three out of three women who were facing either > transplants or the horrors of interferon. > > /berkson.htm </berkson.htm> > > The study, which has been on my website for years, was never published > in the United States. Do you think that might be because liver > transplants and interferon treatments are hugely profitable while common > anti-oxidants and lifestyle and dietary advice are not? > > There is a disease which has infected and permeated the mainstream > medical establishment that is far more injurious to mankind than any of > the diseases they attempt to treat, It's name is " greed " . > > All the best, > > > > > oleander soup , " Cheryl " <cheryl.s.campbell@> > wrote: > > > > Tony, I respect your knowledge base a great deal but LDN is not at all > a chemotherapy type of drug. Naltrexone was/is used in the addictions > field for many years, mainly for opioid related addictions. It > interferes with the serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Dr. Bert Berkson is > one of the world's leading authorities on using LDN with Alpha Lipoic > Acid to control a number of diseases including some cancers. I have a > good friend in Scotland who became part of his first clinical trial. She > was given 6 months three years ago for lung cancer and she is still > going strong. LDN is a very watered down dose which is taken at bedtime > and is only active in the body for four hours. The explaination for its > action is well described through it is beyond me to give that > information here. I have an extensive amount of information on LDN but > the place to start would be listening to Berkson : > http://glasgowldn2009.com/category/conference-sessions/ > > > > Just scroll down to his presentation. > > Cheryl > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.