Concern over curcumin / tumeric

I still hope curcumin, tea and garlic may be our wonder cure. In summary curcumin is believed to be the active ingredient in Indian curry powder known as Tumeric or Turmeric.

But I had doubts last night. I am happy it is safe, Indians typically take up to 2 grams of tumeric a day, and human tests show 8 grams a day is quite safe. It seems the dosage needed may be far higher than Jan takes, as she hates the taste. She takes less than half a gram a day. It also seems it is hard to get it from the digestive system to the cancer, bio-availability and metabolism issues.....

I understand the issues in trying to guess at the possible outcome of research. Professor Aggarwal takes a cancer cell on a glass plate, adds curcumin, irradiates and watches. This is a long step away from Jan eating a pill or curry and getting the same effect on a living cancer cell in her breast.

I should also explain why a ten fold increase in effectiveness of radiotherapy as produced by curcumin and green tea claimed in my earlier post may be different in a real life situation. The ten fold effect was seen in a single treatment of 5 Gy radiation. Jan will receive 15 treatments, each something over 2 Gy. So if say each treatment only killed half the cancer cells, by the end of 15 treatments all but 0.003% of the cancer cells will have been killed by radiotherapy anyway, curcumin just mops up the remaining 0.003%...... but I believe this well worthwhile, as the more one eradicates cancer from Jan's body the better, and one trusts the immune system will pick off the remainder.

I also read research on getting curcumin into the blood stream, how one may need to add black pepper (piperine) to get a 20 fold increase in blood absorption of curcumin. One doctor recommended 2 grams tumeric and half a gram of pepper a day, but Jan refuses that much pepper.

Similarly she hardly touches garlic. I bought quite a bit, and left it in the kitchen whilst a Polish lady visited last Sunday. In one day the Polish lady eat 3 times as much garlic as we eat between us in a week. And the Poles have a third of our breast cancer rate....

But five positive notes:

• I listened to David Hathaway on the radio this morning. He emphasised that God is in control, having seen God heal him from throat cancer 44 years ago, been imprisoned in Czeckoslovakia, yet now preaching in Russia and the Ukrain.
• I read Dr. Steve Martin who says blood absorption is irrelevant, curcumin is carried in the lymphatic system anyway.
• This Japanese report shows eating curcumin reducing lymph node metastasis, a traditional route for cancer spread.
  
• This report suggests curcumin enhances the bodies immune system without the need for large concentrations of curcumin in the blood.
  
• And I read that Indians have less than a third of our breast cancer rate, they just cook a curry and don't worry about these issues!

Ah, the joys of self medication and DIY cures....but the self help folk are the ones who live longest.

Alternative / complementary medicine

I found this tremendous Christian link.

People seem to differ widely on their view of such medicine. Jan and I started as skeptical for 2 good reasons:

• Our background - traditional English tax payers who believe the government and NHS will look after us! Probably my life was saved by the NHS and penicillin when I was six years old.
  
• Our work. Jan has worked at University College Hospital for 20 years, I considered taking a job in their department of medical physics,. They manage CT scanners and radiotherapy equipment.

So we are not against the NHS, and still have trust in them.....

But we are open......God gave us a daughter who had an allergy to dairy products. Dairy could have killed her, yet our GP referred to it as though it was a childish dislike. Her school failed to provide suitable meals, so each day we had to bring her home for lunch. It cost us a fortune in goats milk, soya and other health products...when she accidently had an asthma attack on a school trip she needed emergency treatment, but she has developed into an adult who has dabbled in food research for our largest supermarket chain. So we are open to any questioning that dairy may not be best for us as suggested by Professor Jane Plant's research into Chinese diet.

I looked again at Jane's book, though we have yet to cut dairy. Jan likes her ice creams too much. I read Professor Dr. T. Colin Campbell comments. He is Professor of Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell University, project director of the China-Oxford-Cornell Diet and Health Project, joint chairman of the Diet and Cancer Project of the American Institute for Cancer Research, and co-chairman of the World Cancer Research Fund. " He says "Professor Plant courageously tells a compelling and very personal story on breast cancer that is a must-read, not only for women interested in this disease but also for the scientific and medical communities, who should sit up and take notice. It is time that the long-alleged nutritional worthiness of dairy be brought up for discussion."

I see a contrast between complementary and alternative, though both may be valid. Alternative suggests that conventional treatment is wrong, one refuses it and takes something else, typically a natural product as an alternative. Professor Jane Plant has a touch of this, though most of her work is complementary. She refused Tamoxifen, had four recurrences of her cancer (maybe proving Tamoxifen has some benefits) and developed her diet to overcome cancer in what she claims is a far safer and more effective manner.

This view has some merit, for example the two treatments that Jan is receiving in radiotherapy and Tamoxifen are both known to be strong carcinogens. It could be said one merely swaps one cancer for the fairly high risk of another, maybe that is why radiotherapy offers no long term survival benefit when measured over 15 years.

Complementary is less confrontational, and looks to diet or lifestyle to complement and enhance the traditional medical treatment. As you would expect, we favour that route until we are convinced that conventional treatment does excessive harm.....maybe that will become our position as treatment progresses!

Professor Dr. Bharat Aggwhal works on complemetary. Maybe he has to as an employee of one of America's top cancer hospitals, who has also worked for a $9billion pharma supplier. His ideas on curcumin (found in Indian curry powder), garlic and tea claim to enhance the effect of conventional drugs such as Tamoxifen, make radiotherapy more effective in killing cancer cells, whilst protecting the body from radiotherapy damage. So they may a winning adjunct to the therapy Jan is now receiving... a win win situation.

I see other alternatives such as aromatherapy and herbalism as less effective, though I have just bought three aromatherapy kits, packs of herbal teas, and a humour CD. After all Readers Digest claim "Laughter is the best medicine". Jane Plant reckons aromatherapy releases dangerous carcinogens from the hot oil, but obviously has soothing effect.

Some of the more spiritual ideas are positively dangerous, hence our current concentration on ideas that have a provable scientific basis backed by qualified scientists such as university professors.

Mixing faith, science and health

Wow, I am disappointed by an apparently Christian site. But maybe I should expect that? After all I heard over the weekend that Billy Graham got held up by an armed gunman in a hotel recently. The gunman had rushed into the lobby of a hotel, holding up all guests present at the time, and rifling their pockets for valuables. He came to Billy Graham and instantly recognised the famous preacher/ evangelist. "Its OK, you are Bill Graham, you can keep your wallet" he said. "After all, we Baptists had better stick together!". So not all Christians get it right all the time!

A a Christian who attends a Baptist church I would love to get the best advice from them. I found what appears to be an excellent hospital in the USA with a Baptist foundation. Their cancer care seems excellent, but it is in the USA!

On the converse I found this site that initially looks authoritative, yet is the opposite to most of Professor Jane Plant's ideas. It rates red meat as good, and suggests cutting vegetables. It rates vegetables as bad foods... and quotes references as though they prove this point. BUT IT IS WRONG, the quoted references prove vegetables are good, The specific reference I looked at was entitled "Dietary influences on bone mass and bone metabolism: further evidence of a positive link between fruit and vegetable consumption and bone health?" It is taken from the authoritative American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2000;71:142-151."

So I find a serious error in what claims to be a Christian site......sad

So where is the truth? What is the best source for a cure? When it becomes a matter of life and untimely death I think I will bow to science. I believe we have seen God's grace in this cancer situation. The delays in getting NHS treatment have left us time to read and research in depth.

Before surgery we probably spent 90% of research time in prayer, 10% in internet based research. We prayed for a miraculous cure, but did not receive such a gift. Instead Jan has joined the mass of others receiving successful surgery but followed by what I would describe as questionable and often ineffective treatment. The delays in receiving this treatment has given us 10 weeks to study how to best use and prepare for radiotherapy. It took us nine weeks to even grasp that complementary medicine was indeed complementary, and could dramatically enhance the benefits whilst cutting risks of radiotherapy. Much of this latest information has come from Chinese and Indian medical ideas. As these may seem strange to some I will cover complementary / alternative in detail in the next post.

We are not taking on the spiritual concepts behind traditional Chinese medicine. As soon as I read "Yin and Yang" in a paper or book I stop reading it. Shame as our NHS cancer booklet mentions Yin and Yang, so I missed any further help from it for at least 4 weeks! But importantly the East and West differ in their rates of cancer, with the lowest rates of cancer in Japan, southeast Asia, North Africa and China. So much fruitful research asks "why the difference in cancer rates?" It questions eating, lifestyle, traditional drugs etc. These questions stand genuine scientific scrutiny, and are tested in labs in Texas by Dr. Bharat Aggwhal. and others. The sort of differences coming out as worthy of investigation and appealing to us are:

• Increased vegetable reliance rather than meat - surely Hindus eat no meat?
• Restricted dairy - Chinese eat almost no dairy produce
• Ginger, Garlic, Tumneric and spices - traditional Indian remedies.
• Use of tea, Japanese drink much green tea

We started by discounting Chinese medicine, mainly because of its questionable diagnosis techniques. But God led us to a Chinese nurse with impeccable CV and training who whilst being a Christian opened our eyes to the far simpler Chinese medical practices coupled with prayer. Since then we have been led to read Professor Jane Plant and Professor Richard Beliveau's books, and from Richard's ideas on curcumin onto Professor Bharat Aggwhal's work. As far as I can see he is an Indian looking to simple Indian spices for safe low cost remedies, Yet on reading last night his curcumin at less than a pound a bottle is as effective as Tamoxifen at £10 per month, and far safer and tastier! If one wants one can combine the two to get even more reduction is cancer cell growth, a win win situation.... great.

So our priority will be good science in evaluating a cure rather than the faith or world view of the person discovering it. This is not to discount God's leading, he has led by amazing coincidences. But I believe God has a universal grace to all mankind, and gives knowledge and healing to all. So we welcome good Indian, Chinese, Japanese and Polish ideas.

Politician's potty statistics

A dangerous post, what do I know about pot? Or at least what can I admit to knowing about pot! I read in today's news that our government state pot can be lethal? To who, when and where? According to which US Government authority you want to believe, the lethal dose of marijuana is either about one-third your body weight, or about 1,500 pounds, consumed all at once". If our government claim that can be lethal how can they direct the NHS?

They say that pot causes psychosis. As I understand the risk, it is a 1 in 5,000 chance for men, and a 1 in 20,000 chance for women. Compare that to a 1 in 2 chance of a breast cancer sufferer dying from that cancer within 15 years, when the government claim they have a cure.....

Again I despair of politicians. I liked this blog post.

The importance of this post is not to discuss pot, but to show why I question government statements. They would have one believe that our NHS have cancer all in hand, Jan is cured, there is no need to look for better cures or treatment. If one does not look one will not find. Without something better there is a 50:50 chance Jan will be dead in 15 years from her cancer....I believe God has led us to better than that.

The £1 cancer cure?

I feel amazed and humbled.

Amazed as I look at curry power from curry powder. Specifically tumeric, or the active ingredient which is curcumin. I bought a jar at Sainsbury's last night for less than a pound. My reading suggests that mixed with black pepper and green tea this could make radiotherapy at least ten times as effective in killing cancer cells, with continuing benefits for life.

Humbled as I read the CV of one of the researchers into curcumin, Dr. Bharat Aggwhal. He is a professor searching for cancer cures at a mainstream Texan University Cancer Centre, so not a health food crank, though maybe pre-disposed to look to India for low cost traditional remedies. His CV states "our cancer journey started almost 25 years ago continues with the focus of discovering novel molecules that are safe, efficacious, and yet inexpensive for the treatment of cancer."

He worked for Genentech, strange as they are a $9 billion company yet he freely publishes research results on the web, unlike so may quacks picked up by Google ads who demand money for bogus cures. The use of curcumin (found in curry) is not the dream of a madman, a Google search on "curcumin radiosensitization" finds almost 10,000 hits. The first hit is here, a 2008 report on cervical cancer, so its brand new fresh off the press. Radiosensitization means making tumours more sensitive to radiotherapy, or making radiotherapy better able to kill cancer. Another report suggests curcumin doubles the effectiveness of radiotherapy. Add pepper and green tea to get my ten fold gain! A third report from India is specific to breast cancer and claims less gain, but still substantial.

Green tea and radiosensitization gets mention in 2400 Google hits, I include a fourth and fifth report. Another details benefits of green tea whilst receiving radiotherapy for breast cancer!

The NHS claim they have removed all cancer by surgery, and radiotherapy is to "mop up" any left over! What an over-simplification. Is that why they do not mention curcumin, it would cast doubt on the effectiveness of radiotherapy? Why do the statistics show Jan has a six fold increased risk of getting another cancer over the general public, has lost ten years of life expectancy, and has a 50% chance of death related to this breast cancer within 15 years?

Her doctors disagree between themselves over the use of Tamoxifen whilst receiving radiotherapy. Jan takes it, but it protects cancer cells from radiotherapy damage, so we need all the help we can get to resensitise them.

The use of diet for radiosensitisation is new research that has yet to be proven outside animal and lab trials, so it has no NHS guarantee. But we have to eat something, and at less than a £1 a jar why not try curry, black pepper and green tea? Jan took an eighth of a teaspoon as curried egg last night followed by two cups of tea, none of the profit or foil wrapped accuracy to a milligram that big pharma gives us!

The pepper, tea and tumeric act synergistically. This paper says tea acts in unison with Tamoxifen. I quote "there is now mounting evidence that the active compounds in tea are an effective adjuvant therapy for the treatment of cancer, particularly when combined with other natural anti-cancer agents such as curcumin, or with conventional drugs such as tamoxifen or chemotherapy. Finally, tea and green tea extract can also be used for prevention of recurrence and metastasis." Metastasis is the the deadly spread of cancer that can be kicked off by radiotherapy as it stimulates blood flow to the inflamed breast tumour. Another paper explains the synergy: "Curcumin arrests the growth of cancer cells in the G2 stage. Green tea arrests cancer cell growth at the G1 phase. Combining tea with curcumin increases the odds of killing more cells."

Obviously I exaggerate to suggest this is a £1 cure. But I exaggerate less than Professor Sir Richard Peto who claims with chemotherapy we are close to a cure, yet only delivers a 3% benefit, or radiotherapy where only one report in 12 claims any long term benefit?

Radiotherapy started

Scares me silly.... and probably scares Jan also. A high stress time. Thanks to the couple who ran Jan to the station, and her friend who accompanied her to make it a "shopping trip".

Jan and I argue over how much to follow medical advice, and how much to do our own thing based on Internet research. I believe God can guide us through use of our brain, and has led us by chance to three leads that look promising. Note we are NOT AGAINST the NHS, at least not yet! We want to enhance their and our chances by sensible diet alongside their treatment. We are taking diet advice from university professors and or cancer research professionals, not health food quacks.

1) We used Cavilon this morning with no medical guidance. It is a new use of a protective spray designed for colostomies. In trials it reduces skin burns from radiation, but almost superglued Jan's breast to her stomach!

2) We are using Jane Plant's ideas on eating during radiotherapy. This is at variance from the NHS who say eat well, drink full fat milk, eat protein such as beef etc. during radiotherapy. Jane suggests the beef and milk could be killing one, so we eat garlic, organic eggs, seaweed, vegetables, and have limited meat intake.

3) We are using Richard Beliveau's ideas on diet, and taking green tea. He suggests it is synergistic with radiotherapy and in his lab trial has shown it doubling of effectiveness of radiation.

Why do we need to enhance effectiveness of radiotherapy? Here is an Oxford University presentation which shows the pathetic gains from radiotherapy which the author who works in the field describes as moderate. It claims the risk of Jan's death within 15 years drops from 50% to 45% with radiotherapy, but the ongoing risk of other cancers caused by radiotherapy continues even after that. So she could lose 15% lung capacity, lose heart strength or even die from radiation induced cancers for a small benefit. If we could double that benefit merely by taking green tea 3 times a day during a 4 week course of radiotherapy what a win for such a low cost! £3 for the accountants! As prostate cancer is a similar hormone related cancer to breast cancer this research shows why we think green tea is promising.

The only thing I have yet to get Jan to eat is curry powder... shame as curcumin, its active ingredient appears to be really helpful in protecting the body against radiotherapy whilst combining with radiotherapy to kill cancer cells. She hates the taste of strong curry, but our argument on this continues!

Why we take radiotherapy

I had said it was the con of the century, yet after hours of research I will agree with Jan taking it. There is no question that it reduces the risk of local cancer recurrence in the same breast, but I was dubious because the first eleven learned papers I read all said it made no difference to long term survival over say 5, 10 or 15 years. I think my measure of success would be long term survival.

The NHS must know this weakness, the consent form Jan signed said the purpose was to reduce the risk of local recurrence, nothing about a possible longer life. I discussed my concern over the ineffectiveness of radiotherapy and the PRIME trial suggesting it was useless with the oncologist. She was unaware of the NHS run PRIME trial, all she could say was all hospitals do it.....in fact my research suggests 70% of breast cancer patients receive radiotherapy.

We are taking radiotherapy because the surgeon performed his work expecting radiotherapy to follow. I guess it's a bit like my decorator could either not protect my furnishings and paint carefully, or use dust sheets and paint more rapidly.

Jan had three biopsies, and her WGL procedure had three mistakes, twice when the wire went straight through the tumour and out the other side, and once she had a hook pull back from the tumour, something we were assured was impossible. I suspect Jan's records were lost at that point to destroy evidence. So Jan has had six instances where preparation for surgery will have pushed parts of the tumour into the clear breast, and probably bloodstream and lymphatic system. A google search on seeding cancer along biopsy wire tracks illustrates my concern. So we probably need radiotherapy to clear up this mess.

Cancer authority, Ralph Moss, comments in his February 6th, 2005 Moss Reports Newsletter:

"Imagine the outrage these patients will feel when they learn that many metastases were caused not by the natural progression of their disease but directly by the actions of well-intentioned (but ill informed) doctors. Imagine, further, what will happen when patients find out that questions have been raised about the safety and advisability of needle biopsies for a number of years by some of the finest minds in oncology. Imagine the disruption of the smooth functioning of the "cancer industry" when patients start demanding less invasive ways of diagnosing tumors. And
imagine the class action lawsuits."

On the twelfth learned paper I read by a consultant surgeon in Cambridge dated 2007 I find a claim that radiotherapy increases chances of long term survival by 5%, so we go for it! I have emailed him to question his statistics!

A century of radiotherapy, and we still find the best it can do is increases mortality chances by 5%.... unbelievable, particularly when this is in only one learned paper, the other eleven say it makes no difference. Yet one hears so much about medical advances and the need for radiotherapy! Hence my description of the process as a con trick. Is it that patients need to see something being done, however ineffective, just like taking a placebo?