Thinking outside the box…

http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/health-wellness/2014/05/16/measles-cure-far-off-for-other-cancer-patients/luYXDqHcPOeOjXzZLXXRBP/story.html

After hearing news about an exciting new treatment for incurable cancer using the measles virus, I couldn’t help but wonder whether it could potentially save the life of a young family member with end-stage leukemia. Other cancer patients and their loved ones are likely pondering the same question.

Mayo Clinic researchers published a report on Thursday detailing the first successful treatment of cancer using a genetically engineered measles virus administered at high doses. Two women with multiple myeloma — a rare cancer of white blood cells found in the bone marrow — were treated with a high dose of the virus, from a strain used in vaccines, after their cancers failed to respond to traditional treatments.One patient, a 65-year-old woman, had some tumor shrinkage from the treatment without a full remission of her cancer while the other, a 49-year-old woman, experienced dramatic benefits: She had a complete remission of her multiple tumors and remained cancer-free for nine months. Now 11 months after the treatment, she is doing well after a malignancy that returned on her forehead was successfully treated with radiation.

SO….. the patient was “free’ of cancer for 9 months. Is that a remission or a suppression?

It seems to me that perhaps a better approach to this problem, sadly it doesnt make $$, is to

  • see if a person is benefitted from actually having the measles as a child to boost the immune system.
  • see whether vaccines cause extra strain on the system and produce cancers.
  • accept that the results of this test do not have long term validity because of the return of the cancer.

 

 

Advertisements

3 responses to “Thinking outside the box…

  1. Later, in the same article, it is mentioned that only patients who don´t have measles-antibodies are eligible for this treatment. May this lead to people refusing measles-vaccination (and trying not to get the infection, of course) to be apt for a possible cancer-treatment in the future???

  2. Could it be that it doesn’t matter what it used to shock the immune system into action? Measles vaccine, or water, (in the case of a crab that Hering injected with plain water, whereupon the crab’s immune system reacted so violently it died from its own inflammatory response). And that the shock, caused the immune system to rid the body of the cancer? That could explain the uneven reactions to the vaccine. Some patient’s have stronger responses and can go into remission while others with weaker immune system response can’t rally enough to get there.

    I remember the case of a kidney recipient who had never smoked, but got lung cancer immediately after the transplant. It was thought that, because of the immune system suppression used to keep the body from rejecting the organ, cancer cells in the donor kidney ( which came from a smoker ) were allowed to grow. When the immune suppression was stopped the cancer disappeared. I think that the “evidence-based medicine” crowd have discredited the idea that cancer is even partly an immune system weakness. Probably because their treatments destroy the system!

  3. I rather think they are re-inventing Coley´s toxine-therapy – but instead of injecting a non-patentable natural bacteria, they use vaccines.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coley%27s_toxins

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.