Guest guest Posted May 29, 2007 Report Share Posted May 29, 2007 Hello Michael - Again, thanks for the input and insight. Have you also taken a look at the studies referenced on this page of the Sutherlandia org site: http://www.sutherlandia.org/cancer.html Mind you, I am not trying to argue in favor of s. frutescens, but rather getting your input, because s. frutescens is something I am looking at which has intrigued me. So far, what I have found has appeared pretty impressive, but you are making some good points and I appreciate your input and insights. As far as the " study " , there is no study. Those are the figures furnished the person who devised the OPC oleander based product was kind enough to furnish me at my request - and I have absolutely no reason to doubt them whatsoever, since I know this person, consider him an internet friend and fellow natural health advocate, and will vouch for him most highly. Now, I was aware of L-arginine's reputed abilitie for sexual dysfunction, but cat's claw (Uncaria tomentosa) for erectile dysfunction? It surely has a number of other uses that indigenous use and studies vouch for. The ones I am most impressed with are it's uses for cancer and immune building. Ironically, one of the indigenous uses is as a contraceptive. You know, you may be on to something, maybe we could market the two combinations as a combination sex enhancer and contraceptive? I know you were joking, and so am I, but Cat's Claw IS one of my very favorite botanicals. For more info, I suggest forum members take a look at the plant database entry for uncaria tomentosa (cat's claw) at one of my very favorite websites: http://www.rain-tree.com/catclaw.htm oleander soup , " Michael Uzick, N.M.D. " <druzick wrote: > > Hi Tony, > > If you look at the " published literature " page on sutherlandia.org, > with respect to the notion of some kind of clinical effectiveness for > any kind of condition, what you have there is a bunch of nothing. > > The first reference is " anonymous. " Which is pretty bad. Then there > are number patents which are referenced. If you don't know, there are > a huge number of patents claiming a huge variety of substances to > treat an even greater number of conditions. Sometimes clinical > information is included in a patent. None of this clinical > information is verified in any way. > > It's not reviewed for methodology, statistics, accuracy, common > sense, etc. For example, you and I can apply for a patent today on > the use of a combination of Uncaria tomentosa and L-arginine for the > treatment of erectile dysfunction. We could make up some phoney cases > of successful treatment and viola! We have a patented formula. We > could also be very dubious claim our formula has a published clinical > trial and then reference the patent. > > The majority of the population not knowing any better would be very > impressed. With the right Internet marketing, you and I could be > rolling in quite a bit of dough. This is done all the time. > > While I suppose technically clinical information included in a patent > could be referred to as published, this is certainly not what anyone > with basic knowledge of research would refer to as a published > clinical trial. The latter refers to a peer reviewed study in humans > published in a medical or scientific journal. > > Anyway, of the references listed on the page you mentioned, only two > of them are studies published in some kind of journal. One of them is > looking at pinitol a compound found in the leaves of some other > plant. Perhaps sutherlandia also contains pinitol and that was the > best they could come up with. > > The other study is looking at a combination of 5-FU (a > chemotherapeutic agent) and L-canavanine - I assume for the treatment > of cancer - in cell culture and animals. L-canavanine seems to be a > component of sutherlandia. > > So, as far as their reference sections goes, I would say it's lacking > and honestly an embarrassment. In actuality there is a bit more > research looking at sutherlandia than this poor reference section > suggests. Just not a hell of a lot more. > > I've been meaning to ask about this study in HIV and cancer that > you've referred to. Obviously this isn't something that's published > in a medline indexed journal - or I would have noticed it. So where > does this information come from? Is there any way to review it? > > ~Michael > > > > > At 08:14 PM 5/28/2007, you wrote: > > >Your points are well taken. I am not pesonally familiar with > >Sutherlandia, but I have read some impressive information at the > >Sutherlandia Org site. Have you taken a look there? Here is a link > >to the published literature and you can navigate around the site: > > > ><http://www.sutherlandia.org/literature.html>http://www.sutherlandia.org/litera\ ture.html > > > >The report I get from South Africa is that S. Frutescens has been > >substituted for the cat's claw, pau d'arco and agaricus blazei > >mushroom extracts that make up 20% of the oleander based OPC > >supplement and that results are equal or better than the original formula. > > > >The researcher and patent holder for OPC is doing a doctor's thesis on > >the use of oleander and s. frutescens. I look forward to seeing the > >results, and hope that part of his studies and trials will involve > >comparing the results of using oleander alone with oleander used in > >conjunction with s. frutescens. > > > >I agree completely that lack of objective results make it difficult to > >judge natural treatments. That is why I am so impressed with the > >results over the past three years with OPC. 350 out of 350 HIV/AIDS > >patients still alive and well, and 72 out of 80 cancer patients either > >cancer and tumor free or with their cancers in remission and tumors > >shrinking. Of the 8 that did not make it, 5 were literally in their > >final days and could not hold down the oral supplement and another 3 > >succumbed to organ failure as a likely result of prior chemo. > > > >Now those results are pretty quantifiable, and if such results > >continue with S. Frutescens I will have to conclude that either it is > >pretty effective or else it is the oleander by itself that is so > >incredible. Regardless of the prior or present formulation, the > >patent holder for OPC has been quick to give most of the credit to > >oleander. > > > >Thanks for the input - I am always glad to get good information from > >experienced and qualified folks like yourself. > > > >> > > >--- In > ><oleander soup%40>oleander soup , > > " Michael Uzick, N.M.D. " > ><druzick@> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Tony, > > > > > > I had the opportunity to give Sutherlandia a try with HIV+ patients. > > > At the time there was no published evidence supporting its use in > > > these patients. Today a single in vitro study showing some activity > > > against HIV is the only published evidence that exists. Just about > > > everything inhibits HIV in vitro, thus there's not much to go on. > > > Still, I decided to give it a try based on some un-authored cases I > > > found on a web site which suggested huge activity. > > > > > > I'll say that an un-authored case is something I would normally give > > > little credence. What could possibly be the reason to have no author > > > or source? It's very shady and I'm pretty sure I read them on the web > > > site that was selling the stuff. Still, if there was a possibility > > > that it could help my patients I felt it was my duty to find out. I > > > looked into the safety first and felt reasonably satisfied on that > >count. > > > > > > I tried it in about 20 patients that either hadn't started HIV meds > > > and were looking to avoid them for as long as possible or in patients > > > that were taking a drug holiday and wanted the break to last as long > > > as possible. In both cases this means keeping those CD4 cells up and > > > the viral load down. > > > > > > I didn't keep official track of the patients, but rather I have an > > > impression. Often a number of factors interfere with an objective > > > evaluation, such as stopping and starting HIV meds, not taking the > > > sutherlandia regularly, not having lab work available to see if there > > > was indeed a short lived benefit, patients not following up. > > > > > > I never saw any clear benefit from Sutherlandia. Certainly nothing > > > resembling the supposed case reports I read. I had developed regimes > > > that would clearly boost CD4 counts and typically reduce viral loads > > > in drug naive patients. In patients on drug holiday these regimes > > > also seemed to be effective at extending holidays, but less so than > > > in the former group. Yet, Sutherlandia was a complete dud in my > >experience. > > > > > > As far as cancer goes I couldn't say. However, I would be suspect of > > > natural therapies that have little to no objective evidence and a lot > > > of hype. Case reports can be very persuasive. In reality they can be > > > some what misleading. For example, what if 100,000 people use a > > > " natural " therapy for cancer and 20 people survived their cancer with > > > this treatment. It would be incredibly impressive to hear 20 > > > consecutive testaments. However, the 999,980 patients that had no > > > benefit and died with this treatment can not speak to tell their story. > > > > > > ~Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > >Thanks for your post - I will for sure take a look at Ribose. I would > > > >also suggest that everyone here take a look at the new secondary > > > >herbal ingredient in the oleander based OPC product: sutherlandia > > > >frutescens, the South Africa Cancer Bush (there is an informational > > > >site at > > <<http://www.sutherlandia.org>http://www.sutherlandia.org>http://www.sutherlandi\ a.org). > > > > > >It appears to work wonders by > > > >itself on HIV, Cancer, Hep-C, Diabetes, etc - and those are all > > > >conditions that can leave the victim greatly diminished in energy, > > > >appetitite and immune function. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >--- In > > > ><oleander soup%40>oleander soup , > > > >Preferred Customer > > > ><commonsense2265@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Tony: > > > > > It came thru on my mail but I deleted it anyway. We are here to > > > >help oursleves heal. I suggest people form their own groups when they > > > >want to get on other subjects that is what has chat groups for. > > > >Then you can all talk to your hearts content about anything you wish. > > > > > Has this group looked at Ribose . . . . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > www.DoctorUzick.com > > > ------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > www.DoctorUzick.com > ------------------------------- > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 29, 2007 Report Share Posted May 29, 2007 Hi Tony, You're welcome and I'm happy to give you my opinion. I hope you find it helpful. This new link contains pretty much the entirety of published research on Sutherlandia. As far as research goes, there is not very much at all. There is the single in vitro study with HIV. As I said previously in vitro HIV studies mean almost nothing. There's another study on HIV, but this one only looks at the effects of Sutherlandia on liver metabolism. The conclusion is that the herb indeed effects liver metabolism and thus might interfere with the effectiveness of HIV medications. Again, at least with HIV strains found in the US, based on my clinical experience I feel confident that it has no significant benefit for HIV+ patients. There are 3 studies looking at COX inhibition. The herb may have some anti-inflammatory properties and that may have some benefit in cancer. Still, even here, that's not a lot of evidence at all. The one animal study used extremely high doses which were injected into animals. That doesn't mean a human with arthritic pain will get relief taking a tiny fraction of this dose orally. Cancer is the subject I believe we are most interested in and there are a total of 2 in vitro studies looking at the herb. Cell culture studies are the weakest evidence. This kind of research is suggestive of some potential. Animal studies tell us much more and of course human studies mean the most of all. If you go into your spice cabinet and pick out just about any bottle I think you'll find substantially more anti-cancer research than what exists for Sutherlandia. With all due respect, the rest of what can be found on Sutherlandia.org is just a bunch of hype and gossip. It means nothing to me. The only substance to be found is on the page we are discussing and there is unfortunately almost none. Just because there's essentially no objective evidence that Sutherlandia has benefits for cancer patients doesn't mean that is doesn't. It just means, we have no idea. ~Michael At 11:39 PM 5/28/2007, you wrote: Hello Michael - Again, thanks for the input and insight. Have you also taken a look at the studies referenced on this page of the Sutherlandia org site: http://www.sutherlandia.org/cancer.html Mind you, I am not trying to argue in favor of s. frutescens, but rather getting your input, because s. frutescens is something I am looking at which has intrigued me. So far, what I have found has appeared pretty impressive, but you are making some good points and I appreciate your input and insights. As far as the " study " , there is no study. Those are the figures furnished the person who devised the OPC oleander based product was kind enough to furnish me at my request - and I have absolutely no reason to doubt them whatsoever, since I know this person, consider him an internet friend and fellow natural health advocate, and will vouch for him most highly. Now, I was aware of L-arginine's reputed abilitie for sexual dysfunction, but cat's claw (Uncaria tomentosa) for erectile dysfunction? It surely has a number of other uses that indigenous use and studies vouch for. The ones I am most impressed with are it's uses for cancer and immune building. Ironically, one of the indigenous uses is as a contraceptive. You know, you may be on to something, maybe we could market the two combinations as a combination sex enhancer and contraceptive? I know you were joking, and so am I, but Cat's Claw IS one of my very favorite botanicals. For more info, I suggest forum members take a look at the plant database entry for uncaria tomentosa (cat's claw) at one of my very favorite websites: http://www.rain-tree.com/catclaw.htm --- In oleander soup , " Michael Uzick, N.M.D. " <druzick wrote: > > Hi Tony, > > If you look at the " published literature " page on sutherlandia.org, > with respect to the notion of some kind of clinical effectiveness for > any kind of condition, what you have there is a bunch of nothing. > > The first reference is " anonymous. " Which is pretty bad. Then there > are number patents which are referenced. If you don't know, there are > a huge number of patents claiming a huge variety of substances to > treat an even greater number of conditions. Sometimes clinical > information is included in a patent. None of this clinical > information is verified in any way. > > It's not reviewed for methodology, statistics, accuracy, common > sense, etc. For example, you and I can apply for a patent today on > the use of a combination of Uncaria tomentosa and L-arginine for the > treatment of erectile dysfunction. We could make up some phoney cases > of successful treatment and viola! We have a patented formula. We > could also be very dubious claim our formula has a published clinical > trial and then reference the patent. > > The majority of the population not knowing any better would be very > impressed. With the right Internet marketing, you and I could be > rolling in quite a bit of dough. This is done all the time. > > While I suppose technically clinical information included in a patent > could be referred to as published, this is certainly not what anyone > with basic knowledge of research would refer to as a published > clinical trial. The latter refers to a peer reviewed study in humans > published in a medical or scientific journal. > > Anyway, of the references listed on the page you mentioned, only two > of them are studies published in some kind of journal. One of them is > looking at pinitol a compound found in the leaves of some other > plant. Perhaps sutherlandia also contains pinitol and that was the > best they could come up with. > > The other study is looking at a combination of 5-FU (a > chemotherapeutic agent) and L-canavanine - I assume for the treatment > of cancer - in cell culture and animals. L-canavanine seems to be a > component of sutherlandia. > > So, as far as their reference sections goes, I would say it's lacking > and honestly an embarrassment. In actuality there is a bit more > research looking at sutherlandia than this poor reference section > suggests. Just not a hell of a lot more. > > I've been meaning to ask about this study in HIV and cancer that > you've referred to. Obviously this isn't something that's published > in a medline indexed journal - or I would have noticed it. So where > does this information come from? Is there any way to review it? > > ~Michael > > > > > At 08:14 PM 5/28/2007, you wrote: > > >Your points are well taken. I am not pesonally familiar with > >Sutherlandia, but I have read some impressive information at the > >Sutherlandia Org site. Have you taken a look there? Here is a link > >to the published literature and you can navigate around the site: > > > >< http://www.sutherlandia.org/literature.html > http://www.sutherlandia.org/literature.html > > > >The report I get from South Africa is that S. Frutescens has been > >substituted for the cat's claw, pau d'arco and agaricus blazei > >mushroom extracts that make up 20% of the oleander based OPC > >supplement and that results are equal or better than the original formula. > > > >The researcher and patent holder for OPC is doing a doctor's thesis on > >the use of oleander and s. frutescens. I look forward to seeing the > >results, and hope that part of his studies and trials will involve > >comparing the results of using oleander alone with oleander used in > >conjunction with s. frutescens. > > > >I agree completely that lack of objective results make it difficult to > >judge natural treatments. That is why I am so impressed with the > >results over the past three years with OPC. 350 out of 350 HIV/AIDS > >patients still alive and well, and 72 out of 80 cancer patients either > >cancer and tumor free or with their cancers in remission and tumors > >shrinking. Of the 8 that did not make it, 5 were literally in their > >final days and could not hold down the oral supplement and another 3 > >succumbed to organ failure as a likely result of prior chemo. > > > >Now those results are pretty quantifiable, and if such results > >continue with S. Frutescens I will have to conclude that either it is > >pretty effective or else it is the oleander by itself that is so > >incredible. Regardless of the prior or present formulation, the > >patent holder for OPC has been quick to give most of the credit to > >oleander. > > > >Thanks for the input - I am always glad to get good information from > >experienced and qualified folks like yourself. > > > >> > > > > >< oleander soup%40 > oleander soup , > > " Michael Uzick, N.M.D. " > ><druzick@> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Tony, > > > > > > I had the opportunity to give Sutherlandia a try with HIV+ patients. > > > At the time there was no published evidence supporting its use in > > > these patients. Today a single in vitro study showing some activity > > > against HIV is the only published evidence that exists. Just about > > > everything inhibits HIV in vitro, thus there's not much to go on. > > > Still, I decided to give it a try based on some un-authored cases I > > > found on a web site which suggested huge activity. > > > > > > I'll say that an un-authored case is something I would normally give > > > little credence. What could possibly be the reason to have no author > > > or source? It's very shady and I'm pretty sure I read them on the web > > > site that was selling the stuff. Still, if there was a possibility > > > that it could help my patients I felt it was my duty to find out. I > > > looked into the safety first and felt reasonably satisfied on that > >count. > > > > > > I tried it in about 20 patients that either hadn't started HIV meds > > > and were looking to avoid them for as long as possible or in patients > > > that were taking a drug holiday and wanted the break to last as long > > > as possible. In both cases this means keeping those CD4 cells up and > > > the viral load down. > > > > > > I didn't keep official track of the patients, but rather I have an > > > impression. Often a number of factors interfere with an objective > > > evaluation, such as stopping and starting HIV meds, not taking the > > > sutherlandia regularly, not having lab work available to see if there > > > was indeed a short lived benefit, patients not following up. > > > > > > I never saw any clear benefit from Sutherlandia. Certainly nothing > > > resembling the supposed case reports I read. I had developed regimes > > > that would clearly boost CD4 counts and typically reduce viral loads > > > in drug naive patients. In patients on drug holiday these regimes > > > also seemed to be effective at extending holidays, but less so than > > > in the former group. Yet, Sutherlandia was a complete dud in my > >experience. > > > > > > As far as cancer goes I couldn't say. However, I would be suspect of > > > natural therapies that have little to no objective evidence and a lot > > > of hype. Case reports can be very persuasive. In reality they can be > > > some what misleading. For example, what if 100,000 people use a > > > " natural " therapy for cancer and 20 people survived their cancer with > > > this treatment. It would be incredibly impressive to hear 20 > > > consecutive testaments. However, the 999,980 patients that had no > > > benefit and died with this treatment can not speak to tell their story. > > > > > > ~Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > >Thanks for your post - I will for sure take a look at Ribose. I would > > > >also suggest that everyone here take a look at the new secondary > > > >herbal ingredient in the oleander based OPC product: sutherlandia > > > >frutescens, the South Africa Cancer Bush (there is an informational > > > >site at > > << http://www.sutherlandia.org > http://www.sutherlandia.org>http://www.sutherlandia.org). > > > > > >It appears to work wonders by > > > >itself on HIV, Cancer, Hep-C, Diabetes, etc - and those are all > > > >conditions that can leave the victim greatly diminished in energy, > > > >appetitite and immune function. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >--- In > > > >< oleander soup%40>oleander soup , > > > >Preferred Customer > > > ><commonsense2265@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Tony: > > > > > It came thru on my mail but I deleted it anyway. We are here to > > > >help oursleves heal. I suggest people form their own groups when they > > > >want to get on other subjects that is what has chat groups for. > > > >Then you can all talk to your hearts content about anything you wish. > > > > > Has this group looked at Ribose . . . . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > > www.DoctorUzick.com > > > ------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------- > www.DoctorUzick.com > ------------------------------- > ------------------------------- www.DoctorUzick.com ------------------------------- 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.