Case Studies on Intravenous Vitamin C as a Cancer Cure Could Unravel Big Pharma
By Tim Tucker
The Canada Medical Association Journal has recently re-published a startling scientific paper that deserves a great deal of attention that patients, doctors, and the general public need to be aware of.
Previously recorded in Riordan et al J Orthomol Med 1998: 13: 7203 and Riordan et al PR Health Sci J 2004: 23:115-8, the article, “Intravenously Administered Vitamin C As Cancer Therapy: Three Cases,” was recently re-published in the Canada Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) 2006 174:937-42.
This article may very well be a striking a blow to the pharmaceutical industry.
The article confirms that the Mayo clinic, in dismissing Cameron-Pauling’s work, used oral rather than IV vitamin C, never coming near the plasma concentrations of vitamin C that Cameron-Pauling work had. The Mayo Clinic then used the “results” of their inadequate amount of vitamin C in their non-Cameron-Pauling protocol to undermine the use of vitamin C for treating cancer and put off this cheap, non-toxic effective treatment for cancer for decades.
In this article, however, they use Pauling’s protocol, and with the stunning results.
I am giving just a brief list of the 3 patients here.
Patient 1 – Pulmonary metastatic renal cancer
The patient declined conventional cancer treatment and instead chose to receive high-dose vitamin C administered intravenously at a dosage of 65 g twice per week starting in October 1996 and continuing for 10 months. ….
Of note, more than 4 years after stopping intravenous vitamin C therapy and with the renal cell cancer in complete remission, primary small-cell lung cancer was diagnosed in this patient, who was a long-standing cigarette smoker.
Patient 2 – Bladder cancer
The patient declined systemic or intravesical chemotherapy or radiotherapy and instead chose intravenous vitamin C treatment. ….
Now, 9 years after diagnosis, the patient is in good health with no symptoms of recurrence or metastasis.
Patient 3 – Lymphoma
The patient remains in normal health 10 years after the diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, never having received chemotherapy. ….
Patients with untreated stage III diffuse B-cell lymphoma have a dismal prognosis. This case, like the preceding one, is unusual in that the patient refused chemotherapy, which might have produced a long-term remission. It appears, nonetheless, that a cure occurred in connection with intravenous vitamin C infusions.
In addition, take a look at a sample of replies posted in the section provided for comment:
A Glimmer Of Hope – Nothing Trivial I Would Say
This paper is without fault, a refreshing change from the usual politically correct, Big Pharma-beholden ramblings with an agenda. It is not known who first proposed the use of Vitamin C in cancer treatment. It was recognised though, in the early fifties, that all “tumour carriers” showed adrenal insufficiency as well as a deficiency in Vitamin C.1
Pauling and Hoffer, co-founders of Orthomolecular Medicine, have long believed that Vitamin C could be a valuable tool in cancer treatment. Pauling maintained that Vitamin C should be used as an adjunct to other therapies, he showed that 10 g oral intake was enough to significantly prolong the lives of terminal cancer patients.
Recent studies and clinical observation have shown that the use of Vitamin C ought to be standard procedure in cancer, as a typical study published by Abram Hoffer and Linus Pauling in 1993 indicated.2 The outcome of the study was that a significant difference of survival times was noted between the two groups. One group was following conventional treatment with the vitamin regimen consisting of Vitamin C and other nutrients, the other group received no nutrients in addition to those from their food.
There are examples of persons with far advanced and properly documented cancers whose prognoses were dismal and who seemed to recover from cancer on the basis of taking Vitamin C.
Recent work by Riordan, Levine, Hoffer, A. and others have given rise to a new enthusiasm. In fact, the earlier expectations of Orthomolecular Medicine look set to be surpassed. By its simple mechanism of producing H2O2 to destroy cancer cells, Ascorbic Acid has great promise.
Once before, this was sensed by Pauling many years ago. The Mayo Clinic, unable to allow an outsider like Pauling to go directly to the people and tell them how to treat illnesses, they repeated Pauling’s experiments in strict “secrecy”, although they changed the rules in order to come up with a solid condemnation.
One would think that we are all in this together. Cancer is a terrible killer, the very word scares the daylight out of most. Yet, the battle against this natural remedy, which happens to be an orphan “drug”, continues. After all, it is rather “implausible” that Ascorbic Acid could be a major key.
Vitamin C treatment of cancer has resulted in complete recoveries from documented cancers. Not all of these can be spontaneous remissions.
The next step ought to be to determine why Vitamin C does not seem to be effective in all people and against all cancers. Common sense would make that mandatory.
There is always time to raise the price of Ascorbic Acid to astronomical heights later.
1 Herberger,The treatment of inoperable cancer, 1965 John Wright & Sons, Bristol
2 Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine III, 1993
This study cannot go unnoticed an unaddressed by the scientific and medical communities any longer. We are looking a paper that may help unravel the pharmaceutical industry and its billion dollar cancer, chemo, and radiation methodology.
This post (Case Studies on Intravenous Vitamin C as a Cancer Cure Could Unravel Big Pharma) by Tim Tucker originally appeared here on NaturalBlaze.com It can be republished provided that all internal links and this message remain intact.
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Please consult your preferred healthcare practitioner. The information on this website is not intended to replace your relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice.