<< Feedback on Treatments – Two Case Studies >>
<< What Is CAM, Anyway? >>
<< Graviola – Help From The Amazon Rain Forest >>


Feedback on Treatments

Two clients have been kind enough to give me some feedback
on clinics they have visited in the last few weeks. I’ll
try to pass on some of their observations. I will also up-
date you on their progress in succeeding newsletters. Names
have been changed to protect their privacy:

Eileen in Redmond, Washington.

Eileen investigated the Tijuana clinics for treatment of her
cancer. She chose the Hoxsey clinic. To familiarize you
with this treatment, I will quote from Richard Walters great
book “Options:”

“For over three decades, Harry Hoxsey (1901-1974), a self-
taught healer, cured many cancer patients using an herbal
remedy reportedly handed down by his great-grandfather. By
the 1950’s, the Hoxsey Cancer Clinic in Dallas was the world’s
largest private cancer center, with branches in seventeen
states. Born in Illinois, the charismatic practitioner of
herbal folk medicine faced unrelenting opposition and harass-
ment from a hostile medical establishment. Nevertheless, two
federal courts upheld the ‘therapeutic value’ of Hoxsey’s
internal tonic. Even his archenemies, the American Medical
Association and the Food and Drug Administration, admitted
that his treatment could cure some forms of cancer. A Dallas
judge ruled in federal court that Hoxsey’s therapy was ‘com-
parable to surgery, radium, and x-ray’ in its effectiveness,
without the destructive side effects of those treatments.


But in the 1950’s, at the tail end of the McCarthy era, Hoxsey’s
clinics were shut down. The AMA, NCI, and FDA organized a
‘conspiracy’ to ‘suppress’ a fair, unbiased assessment
of Hoxsey’s methods, according to a federal report to Congress.
Hoxsey’s Dallas clinic closed its doors in 1960, and three
years later, at Hoxsey’s request, Mildred Nelson, R.N., his
long-time chief nurse, moved operation to Tijuana, Mexico.


The Bio-Medical Center, as the clinic is now called, treats all
types of cancer, with Nelson overseeing a staff of fully licensed
medical doctors and support personnel. The records indicate that
many patients, some arriving with late stages of the disease,
have been helped and even completely healed of cancer by the
non-toxic Hoxsey therapy, which today combines internal and
external herbal preparations with a diet, vitamin and mineral
supplements, and attitudinal counseling.”

There’s lots more about Harry Hoxsey’s intriguing story in the
book. I highly recommend you get it and read it.

Well, what about Eileen? Her experience was very positive. She
opted for the one-day visit to the clinic. She brought her med-
ical records with her. After a complete examination, she was
sent home with a tailored set of herbs, vitamins, supplements
and instructions on a macro-biotic diet. She plans to return for
a checkup in about three months. The cost? $1,200. Patsy said
there is a $3,500 option which covers a longer stay at the clinic
and includes follow up visits.

More on Eileen in later newsletters…

Paula in San Antonio, Texas:

Paula had a hysterectomy on September 17 2001. The pathology
report showed endometrial cancer cells in the lining of the
uterus. In a few days after the operation, she began taking
magesterol, a hormone.

Recovering nicely, she began taking several CAM products —
MGN-3, beta glucan, shark cartilage and acidophilus. She was feeling good.

Paula and her husband read lots of literature on cancer, including
my book They decided to try the Burzynski Clinic in Houston,
Texas. After sending Paula’s records a couple of weeks before,
they visited the clinic at the end of October 2001. Their
experience was anything but positive.

After waiting one hour beyond their appointment time, they
were seen by one of the physicians. Paula commented to
him that they probably wouldn’t have had to wait an hour if
she had been Jane Seymour or one of the other celebrities
whose pictures filled the walls of the fancy clinic building.

Their interview with the physician proved that he had not looked
at Paula’s records. This, of course, bothered them.

Paula had a discussion with Dr. Burzynski, himself. She
asked him if he had statistics on the treatment’s success with
ovarian cancers like hers. He said they didn’t have enough to
compute valid success rates. She also asked him for names of
CAM-sympathetic doctors in San Antonio. He said he would get
her some names.

Before I give you the results of their visit, let me quote an
excerpt from Richard Walters’ book “Options” on Burzynski:

“‘The body itself has a treatment for cancer,’ says Dr. Stanislaw
Burzynski. The Polish-born physician-biochemist, based in
Houston, Texas, discovered that a group of peptides
(short chains of amino acids) and amino-acid derivatives
occurring naturally throughout our bodies inhibit the growth
of cancer cells. In his view, these substances are part of
a biochemical defense system completely different from our
immune system. Unlike the immune system, which protects
us by destroying invading agents or defective cells, the
biochemical defense system reprograms, or corrects, defective
cells. It carries ‘good’ information to abnormal cells,
instructing them to develop normally.


Dr. Burzynski named these peptides antineoplastons because of
their ability to inhibit neoplastic, or cancerous, cell growth.
He discovered that cancer patients have a drastic shortage of
these compounds in their bodies–blood samples of advanced
cancer patients reveal only 2 or 3 percent of the amount
typically found in healthy individuals. By simply reintroducing
the peptides into the patient’s bloodstream, either orally
or intravenously, he brings about tumor shrinkage or complete
remission. In many cases, just weeks after the start of
treatment, tumors have shrunk in size or disappeared.
Most types of cancer reportedly respond to the therapy, which
is safe and nontoxic. The natural substances used are well
tolerated by the body, even in high doses, without any of the
disastrous side effects routinely associated with toxic chemo-
therapy and radiation.


…Some of the most exciting results obtained with antineoplastons
have been with tumors that usually do not respond to chemo-
therapy, radiation, or immunotherapy. These include malignant
brain tumors (astrocytoma, states III and IV, and glioblastoma),
advanced cancer of the prostate, certain forms of lung cancer,
bladder cancer, and even cancer of the pancreas. For example
in a Phase II trial involving astrocytoma, a highly
malignant form of brain cancer, twenty patients–nearly
all of them in advanced stages of the disease–were
treated with antineoplastons. All but one received and
failed prior standard therapies.


Four patients achieved complete remission, and two others,
partial remission. Ten other patients showed objective
stabilization (less than 50 percent decrease of tumor size).
Since the end of this study, in May 1990, some of the ten
patients classified as stabilized have achieved complete or
partial remission.


…While Burzynski’s breakthroughs are being eagerly pursued
abroad, here in the United States, where he lives and sees
patients, the doctor has been the target of an ill-informed,
multipronged attack aimed at discrediting him and closing down
his clinic. Despite the fact that he has published 150
scientific papers and holds twenty patents for antineoplaston
treatment covering sixteen countries, his work has been
dismissed as quackery by such interlocking government
agencies and private-sector vested-interest groups as the
Food and Drug Administration and the American Cancer Society.
Close-minded oncologists, when asked by their patients
about Dr. Burzynski, have said that he has published nothing.”

For lots more detail on Dr. Burzynski’s experience, please read

As for Paula, she was given a large number of pills called
PBN (sodium phenylbutyrate). She was told to begin with
1 every two hours, six times a day. That was to be built
up to NINE every two hours. They said to continue taking the
MGN-3, but stop taking the beta glucan and acidophilus
because they interfered with this treatment.

By the time she reached the FIFTY FOUR pills per day level,
Paula was very sick. She was so nauseous, she could not
hold down either the Burzynski pills or any other medication
or food. She called the Burzynski Clinic. The physician
said stop taking the PBN until the nausea went away, then
begin at a lower level again.

When Paula asked for the names of CAM-competent doctors
which Dr. Burzynski had promised her, the physician
said Dr. Burzynski was out of town and he didn’t know anything
about that.

The statistics that Burzynski publishes are not very
impressive. For example, they showed that as of July 2001,
the “objective response” rate for both colon and breast
cancer was 57.2%. The rest had either “stable disease” or
“progressive disease.” Objective response means complete
response, partial response or substantial decrease in tumor size.

The cost: $4,500 PER MONTH. They handle only outpatients.
The payment seems to cover only office visits (about every six
weeks, in Paula’s case) and the medication. While a few
insurance companies will reimburse for the treatment,
Medicare will not.

More on Paula’s progress in subsequent newsletters…

What Is CAM Anyway?

By now, if you have been doing your homework, you have
probably seen the term “Complementary and Alternative
Medicine (CAM)” used often in the literature.

There is a long article on the semantics of the
therapy business in the Townsend Letter for Doctors
and Patients. It covers the evolution of the words “alternative”
and “complementary.” It talks about “conventional,”
“allopathic” and “integrated” medicine. I won’t bore you
with the elaborate dissection of these words. The main point
of the article was that what is called “alternative”
or “complementary” is really not secondary to so-called
“conventional” treatment. Most of today’s
treatments would now be “conventional” if they had
given fair and thorough study by the cancer “system.”

As you know, I consider Dr. Ralph Moss to be one of the
real experts in all forms of cancer therapy. Here is what
Dr. Moss has to say on this subject:

“I don’t believe in alternative OR conventional medicine, and
neither should you. Does this surprise you? The world of medicine
is divided into camps just like our political party system, each
one bad-mouthing the other. This war does absolutely nothing for
the patients. You are asked to put your faith and belief in one
system to the exclusion of the other. And sometimes you are even
punished for going over to the ‘enemy’ camp. I remember a beauti-
ful but gaunt young woman, her head wrapped in a kerchief, who
came up to me after a lecture I gave and told me that her oncol-
ogist angrily refused to continue treating her when she told him
she was using some common alternative therapies as well. I’ve
heard this same story from many others.”

I have heard similar reports from many of my clients. In your pur-
suit of a cure for your cancer, don’t get caught up in this petty
battle. On the other hand, you need to be aware of it so you can
make intelligent choices. People like Dr. Moss use a 360 degree
view of the entire landscape of cancer treatments. You should,
too. One of the best ways to start or enhance your research is
at Dr. Moss’ web site:


Graviola – Help From The Amazon Rain Forest

My good friend George Freaner was kind enough to send me an
article on Graviola while I was “goofing off” in Spain. You
may have heard of this substance before, but I would like to
remind you of it, because it is readily available without a
prescription and it is quite inexpensive (cheap!).

Here’s the article. It’s from “The Doctor’s Complete Guide to
Conquering Cancer,” published by Agora Health Books of Baltimore, MD:

“Natural Cancer Fighter From the Amazon May be 10,000 Times
Stronger than Chemotherapy


Native medicine men in the Amazon have known about the
Graviola tree for centuries. But cancer patients are just starting
to learn about the benefits of the natural medicine it provides us
with, which some say is more powerful than chemotherapy.


In as many as 20 laboratory studies over the last 30 years,
Graviola has been found to selectively kill malignant cancer cells
–cells from breast, colon, prostate, pancreatic and lung cancers
specifically. In a 2000 study at the Catholic University in South
Korea, two chemicals extracted from Graviola seeds showed
cytotoxic results comparable to those of Adriamycin,
a common chemotherapy drug. Another study, published
in the Journal of Natural Products in 1996, found that
Graviola killed colon cancer cells at “10,000 times the
potency of Adriamycin.” Research at Purdue University
found that leaves from the Graviola tree killed six different
kinds of cancer cells, showing particular effectiveness
against prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer, and lung cancer


Proponents of Graviola report that it is able to selectively
kill cancer cells without damaging healthy cells — and
without serious side effects. Some users have reported
gastrointestinal upset at high doses; this may be avoided,
however, by taking Graviola with food. As a nutritional su-
pplement, it is not subject to FDA approval and is available
by mail order from Raintree Nutrition; tel. (800) 780-5902.
Raintree supplies Graviola leaves, which can be made into
a tea, as well as Graviola capsules. The recommended do-
sage varies from 1 gram to 5 grams of Graviola per day, or
six to eight capsules daily. The cost for Graviola is about 20
cents per capsule.”

I usually don’t quote from original research papers. Here’s
a sample from one on graviola which will show you why:

“They are potent inhibitors of NADH: ubiquinone oxidoreductase,
which is in an essential enzyme in complex I leading to
oxidative phosphorylation in mitochondria. A recent
report showed that they act directly at the ubiquinone-
catalytic site(s) within complex I and in microbial
glucose dehydrogenase. They also inhibit the ubiquinone-
linked NADH oxidase that is peculiar to the plasma membranes
of cancerous cells.”

However, here is a quote from that same report on Purdue
University’s research on graviola, which is a little more
decipherable to us normal humans, and which is quite

“In 1997, Purdue University published information with
promising news that several of the Annonaceous acetogenins
‘not only are effective in killing tumors that have proven
resistant to anti-cancer agents, but also seem to have a
special affinity for such resistant cells.’ In several
interviews after this information was publicized, Purdue
pharmacologist Dr. Jerry McLaughlin, the lead researcher
in most of Purdue’s studies on the Annona chemicals,
says cancer cells that survive chemotherapy may
develop resistance to the agent originally used against them as
well as to other, even unrelated, drugs. ‘The term multi-drug
resistance (MDR)has been applied to this phenomenon,’
McLaughlin says. He explains that such resistance develops
in a small percentage of cancer cells when they develop
a ‘P-glycoprotein mediated pump’ capable of pushing
anti-cancer agents out of the cell before they can kill it.
Normal cells seldom develop such a pump.


‘If having this pump was such a good deal, all cells
would have it. But all cells don’t,’ McLaughlin says in
a statement from Purdue. ‘In a given population of cancer
cells in a person, maybe only 2% of the cancer cells
possess this pump. But it’s those 2% of cancer cells
that eventually grow and expand to create drug-
resistant tumors.’ McLaughlin and his colleagues say some
studies have tried to bypass these pumps by keeping
them busy with massive doses of other drugs, like the blood
pressure agent verapamil. In this way, it was hoped
that some of the anti-cancer drugs would enter the cell
and destroy it. But this only caused potentially
fatal side effects such as loss of blood pressure.


In the June [1997] issue of Cancer Letters, the Purdue
researchers reported that the Annonaceous acetogenin,
bullatacin, preferentially killed multi-drug resistant
cancer cells because it blocked production of adenosine
triphosphate, ATP — the chief energy-carrying compound
in the body. ‘A multi-drug resistant cell requires a
tremendous amount of energy to run the pump and extrude
things out of the cell,’ McLaughlin says. ‘By inhibiting
ATP production, we’re essentially pulling the plug on its
energy source.’ But what about the effect on ATP in normal
cells? ‘Normal cells and standard cancer cells may be able
to minimize the effect of this compound because they don’t
require vast amounts of energy needed by the pump-
running cells,’ the Purdue researcher says.


‘The resistant cell is using its extra energy for this pump
as well as to grow, so it is really taxed for energy.
When we mess with the energy supply, it kills the cell.'”

A good web site for more info on Graviola is:


Check it out!!


In case you have wondered at the spartan simplicity of the
format of this newsletter, it has a purpose. From experi-
ence publishing several newsletters, I’ve found that this
format — simple text with lines no longer than 65 char-
acters — is the only one that will print on all e-mail
screens (maybe even WebTV) the same. Most of you will
notice that the web links in this newsletter are high-
lighted in blue. Clicking on them will open your browser
and take you to that site. If they are not highlighted
(a la AOL), you may need to “copy and paste” them into
your browser.

I’ll be back sometime soon with another newsletter. Be
well and send your friends to my new, improved website:



Bill Henderson
Author “Cure Your Cancer” e-book
141 pages – $14.95 – instant PDF download

As for the legal stuff — Disclaimer: The author of this
newsletter is a researcher and writer, not a doctor. Any
treatment for an illness should be shared with your doctor
before you attempt it.