The War On Cancer -Germany: A Mecca for Cancer Patients

[Guest guest]

The War On Cancer -Germany: A Mecca for Cancer Patients

The War On Cancer

(February-March Townsend Letter Column)

 

© 2001 by Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D.

 

 

 

 

Germany: A Mecca for Cancer Patients

I recently returned from a three-week tour of European cancer

hospitals. My 3,000-mile journey took me and my staff to holistic

clinics in Germany, Switzerland and Denmark. This tour reinforced my

feeling, gained from three previous journeys, that these countries

are world leaders in the integrative approach to cancer.

 

Because of their long historical traditions, and a more lenient

regulatory environment, they have developed some approaches to

cancer that are less toxic and more effective than what is generally

available in America. Increasingly, Germany is a Mecca for cancer

patients and an inspiration for holistic practitioners.

 

There is no single protocol embraced by all the clinics that I

visit. In fact, they range from strictly naturopathic facilities to

a few that perform clinical trials on immune-modulating drugs. But

the majority practice integrative oncology, which means a

combination of conventional methods (including small amounts of

chemotherapy, when necessary) with innovative ways of killing cancer

cells and supporting overall health.

 

Such measures include hyperthermia; mistletoe extracts; immune

stimulants; fever therapy; ozone and oxygen treatments; homeopathic

preparations, etc. They also emphasize art, dance and music therapy,

as well as massages, baths and psychological support. Innovative

diagnostic techniques include electroacupuncture according to Voll,

thermography, and biological terrain assessment.

 

There is intense interest in electrical current treatments, or

galvanotherapy, a technique that originated in Sweden, migrated to

China, and now has found its way back to Europe. There is intense

interest in dendritic cell vaccines. This hardly exhausts the list.

German clinicians have the freedom to use new treatments outside the

context of clinical trials, and do not suffer from the kind of

harassment that is so common in the US and other countries.

 

At one German clinic, an American melanoma patient was given the

drug DTIC in rather high doses. Normally, one would expect nausea

and vomiting. But he also received whole-body hyperthermia. When he

awoke from sedation, his first question was, " So, where are we going

for dinner? " And in fact that very evening he and his wife went to

eat in an Italian restaurant. To that point, he had experienced no

side effects from his treatment.

 

At another clinic, a patient with profound lymphedema of the arm

after surgery for sarcoma told of total relief after one session of

hyperthermia. Yet hyperthermia is rarely used in America, and is

still considered experimental and controversial.

 

Many innovative German clinics are located in spa towns, and they

generally treat the person with cancer as an honored guest rather

than a medical cipher. At some centers the apparatus is hidden from

view in cabinets disguised as fine furniture. The food, of course,

varies, but some is astonishingly good. A few clinics are like

gracious four-star hotels.

 

Germany could well be called the home of alternative medicine. After

all, homeopathy was formulated by Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843), who

came from Saxony. Naturopathy also originated in Germany, with the

work of Father Sebastian Kneipp (1824-1897) and others. Kneipp

emphasized diet, herbs, sunlight and water treatments. His emigré

disciple, Benedict Lust (1872-1945) brought Kneipp's philosophy to

America, renaming it Naturopathy. He opened the first U.S. health

food store in 1896.

 

In Germany, signs of natural healing are everywhere. A conventional

pharmacy usually features herbal and homeopathic treatments in the

window. There are alternative doctors and clinics everywhere.

Hundreds of alternative health books are published each year.

 

It is well known that the Germans are crazy for walking in the

mountains and woods. There is a vast network of spas, which are

founded on a naturopathic philosophy. Some of these baths (such as

Baden-Baden) have been around since ancient times. Others date from

the 19th or early 20th century. Their strange-tasting waters are

filled with various minerals. Soaking in them is said to soothe the

body and the soul. Thermal baths provide a primitive form of

hyperthermia. There are also " Moorbads " (mud baths) of various

esoteric kinds.

 

There are about 170 towns with the prefix " Bad " (meaning Bath) in

their name, and this hardly exhausts the list. Each spa has

its " Trinksaal " (drinking room) and its " Kurhaus " in the " Kurpark. "

Frequently, this Kurpark is the central focus of the town. Germans

and other tourists stroll in the lovely park, soak in the pools, or

take treatments at one of the many clinics that surround it.

Facilities range from small hotels with saunas in their basements to

elaborate medical centers and research facilities.

 

In America and England, there was once a large network of public

baths as well, but that movement sank into obscurity. In Germany,

spas are priced within reach of nearly all, and in fact many spas

double as the town's swimming pool. You can still have a reasonably

priced soak at the Lincoln Baths in Saratoga Springs, New York, but

that is the rare exception. Nowadays, America's idea of a spa is an

ultra-expensive resort where you pay megabucks for tiny portions of

fat-free food. One week at a famous California facility will set you

back $5,375.

 

For cancer patients, the proximity of holistic clinics to spas is an

important feature. While patients are initially focused on their

medical treatments, the level of comfort of the clinic helps to

shape the totality of their experience. If patients and their

companions are uncomfortable or bored, this impinges on the

effectiveness of the treatment. In addition, the baths themselves

and the pampering, may contribute to healing.

 

 

MEDIZINISCHE WOCHE

At the end of October, I had the honor of giving the concluding

speech at the annual meeting of the German Society of Oncology. This

was part of the 34th annual Medicine Week in Baden-

Baden. " Medizinische Woche " is a huge event for alternative

medicine: one indication is that the meeting program is now 316

pages in length. Participants come from as far away as Australia,

New Zealand and Fiji to attend this famous meeting.

 

The German Society of Oncology (DGO) is composed of hundreds of

cancer practitioners who integrate conventional cancer treatments

with innovative supportive measures. The society was founded decades

ago by Hans Nieper, MD and currently headed by Josef Beuth, MD, a

researcher at the University of Cologne. My own speech was

entitled " The Grand Illusion of Chemotherapy. " (It is available

online at www.ralphmoss.com/dgo2000.html.) It sparked considerable

discussion among the attendees.

 

Later that week, I spoke to several hundred patients and physicians

at the " Aiblinger Gespraeche 2000, " another outstanding meeting

conveened by Friedrich R. Douwes, MD and his St. Georg clinic. This

was held in the spacious Kurhaus of the Bavarian town of Bad

Aibling. My third and final lecture was at the Humlegaarden clinic

in Humlebaek, Denmark, headed by Finn Scøtt Andersen, MD.

 

In all, I think that the treatments offered at these European

clinics represents the best hope at the moment for cancer patients,

including Americans. These clinics do not reject the useful parts of

conventional oncology, but attempt to integrate modern knowledge

into a more humane and rational treatment philosophy.

 

 

 

---

-----------

 

CHEMOTHERAPY AND LUNG CANCER

Adding chemotherapy to radiation therapy does not prolong survival

in patients with operable, non-small-cell lung cancer, according to

a large, randomized study published in the October 26 issue of the

New England Journal of Medicine.

 

Two hundred and forty-two patients were randomized to receive

radiation therapy alone while 246 received radiation therapy plus

chemotherapy. The median survival time was 39 months in the group

given radiotherapy and just 38 months in the group that received

chemotherapy and radiotherapy. In other words, adding chemotherapy

made the results a little worse.

 

The authors, from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, concluded

that " compared with radiotherapy alone, adjuvant radiotherapy and

chemotherapy with cisplatin and etoposide does not … prolong

survival in patients with completely resected stage II or IIIa non-

small-cell lung cancer {N Engl J Med 2000;343:1217-22}.

 

In an accompanying editorial, two oncologists, Desmond N. Carney, MD

and Heine Hansen, MD, concluded that adjuvant chemotherapy in such

patients " should not be considered standard care. "

 

What isn't mentioned is that postoperative radiotherapy by itself

may be useless or harmful to non-small cell lung cancer patients. A

study published in the Lancet in 1998 analyzed results in 2,128

patients who received surgery alone or surgery plus adjuvant

radiation therapy.

 

This analysis revealed a 21 percent increase in the risk of death in

patients receiving radiation therapy. Harm was greatest for patients

who had early (stage I/II) lung cancer. The Lancet authors

concluded, " Postoperative radiotherapy is detrimental to patients

with early-stage completely resected NSCLC and should not be used

routinely for such patients " {Lancet 1998;352:257-63}.

 

I was told by some radiologists that they intended to continue

giving radiation therapy to such patients, despite the Lancet

report. I wonder if medical oncologists will also continue to give

adjuvant chemotherapy to such patients, despite the New England

Journal article? Isn't it time to take a more serious look at non-

toxic treatments?

 

 

THE VANUATU CURE

One of my clients asked me to look into a new website,

www.cancer.vu. It was offering a remedy for cancer, she said, which

appealed to her.

 

What I found was scary: some nameless person or persons, whose web

business was based on a small island in the Pacific, was offering a

secret cancer " cure " for an outrageous price.

 

A scientist [they say] has discovered that the sap of a common plant

has 'magic bullet' effectiveness against a wide range of cancers.

But this unnamed scientist has greedy investors who are trying to

monopolize this cure for their own profit. Happily, these

humanitarians operating out of the island republic of Vanuatu

obtained a copy of the patent application, and have made it

available to the general public.

 

The treatment comes as both an external salve and an injectable

medication. They won't say what it consists of or how it was made.

It has not been approved by any regulatory body. In fact, it is sold

as a veterinary product. You must assume all risks when you purchase

it.

 

If something untoward happens (or if nothing happens) don't try to

find them in Vanuatu. That's just a dropbox. They give no names,

email or street addresses, or phone numbers. They announce in

advance that they won't correspond in anyway with anyone for any

purpose.

 

They do claim that the product is " 100 percent successful " for

malignant melanoma, as well as brain metastases and breast, lung,

colon, cervical, squamous and basal cell cancers. Oh yes, and

prostate cancer, too. They give a little sample of the patent

application: if you believe it is authentic, then the product was

only tested in a single cancer cell line.

 

Ironically, the company selling this product (which, for all we

know, could be distilled water) calls itself Bioethicals, Inc. Don't

you just love it? They are ethical because they are making

this " cure " available at " minimal cost to all cancer sufferers in

the world. " The minimal charge is $2500 for 10 vials. If you took it

for just three months, it would set you back $22,500. By a lucky

coincidence, Vanuatu also happens to be a center for numbered bank

account.

 

I hate to attack any new cancer treatment. But if proponents of new

methods are honest, they need to stand up and be counted. Paranoid

fear of the FDA is no excuse. They need to make a good faith effort

to have their treatments carefully evaluated by independent

outsiders, including the National Center for Complementary and

Alternative Medicine. A willingness to engage in cooperative

research is, for me, the hallmark of seriousness in the field of

cancer. Until then…Internet shopper beware!

 

 

IMMUNE SURVEILLANCE CONFIRMED

Finally, an exciting article in the Lancet shows that people who are

immunodeficient really do have an increased RISK of cancer. This so-

called immune surveillance theory was viciously attacked by

the " quackbusters " a decade ago, because it gave aid and comfort to

non-toxic approaches to cancer.

 

Scientists at the Saitama Cancer Center in Japan have now shown that

people whose white blood have medium to high cytotoxic activity of

their peripheral-blood lymphocytes have far less cancer than those

whose cells have low cytotoxic activity, in fact up to 50 percent

less. Higher rates of cytotoxic activity is associated with normal

body weight, not smoking, an increased intake of green vegetables,

and moderate alcohol consumption {Lancet 2000;356:1795-1799}. All

good advice, in any case.