Comments on: Cancer Quackery is Dangerous – The Gonzalez Treatment

By: Science-Based Medicine » Suzanne Somers’ Knockout: Dangerous misinformation about cancer (part 1)

Mon, 26 Oct 2009 04:03:37 +0000

[...] Cancer Quackery is Dangerous – The Gonzalez Treatment [...]

By: TsuDhoNimh

TsuDhoNimh — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 01:35:22 +0000

Orac said What surprised me more is that the survival of the chemotherapy group. That was much higher than the usual reported survival in gemcitabine-alone groups.

They changed to a 3-drug mix early on, because the gemcitabine had been shown (in other trials, of course) to be less effective than the mix.

It was “state of the art” chemo compared to the enzyme treatment from the 1980s or whenever.

By: Steven Novella

Steven Novella — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 12:08:45 +0000

Orac – thanks. I thought survival was a bit longer untreated. But of course, worthless does cause the indirect harm of deferring standard therapy that is effective, and it did appear to have a negative effect on quality of life.

By: Zelocka

Zelocka — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 19:17:59 +0000

I am sure if you ask most that try this you will get the same response. In essence it’s a dead if I do or dead of a don’t feeling and at that point it’s any port on a storm. Despite being more effective than anything else, radiation therapy has a major strike against it because people that to it look sicker than people that try these quack remedies. We are a society that is pretty reactionary about most things so that negative is going to scare people off even if there is limited to no underlining logic behind it.

If cancer treatment was something that didn’t make you look and feel worse than not doing it, I do not think we would see this much quackery around it still.

By: Orac

Orac — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 21:32:10 +0000

The bottom line is this – that Gonzalez treatment is not only worthless it is harmful and reduces quality of life.

Actually, that’s not strictly true, at least whether the Gonzalez protocol is actively harmful. Pancreatic cancer sucks. When it’s unresectable, it will kill you and fairly quickly. Consquently, it’s not clear whether the increased death rate in the Gonzalez protocol arm of the study is because of active harm or because the therapy is utterly worthless, resulting in, essentially, a survival curve undistinguishable from that of patients with untreated unresectable pancreatic cancer. Generally, that median survival is expected to be around 3-4 months–essentially the same as the Gonzalez arm. That’s not a defense of the Gonzalez therapy; rather it’s simply cautioning that this data is consistent with no effect due to the Gonzalez protocol, which is plenty bad. Remember, the comparison was not with untreated patients; it was with patients receiving treatment.

What surprised me more is that the survival of the chemotherapy group. That was much higher than the usual reported survival in gemcitabine-alone groups. I wonder what’s going on there.

By: HHC

HHC — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 05:07:21 +0000

Joe & tmac57, Read Gurney’s account of a victim of Gonzalez’s treatment. Definitely, the victiim reveals the course of the illness sans treatment. I think coffee enemas are little extreme. This must be a What’s Up Doc Joke…my deceased relatives wouldn’t stand for rectal coffee breaks. As for cooking, cancer treatment can make you extremely nauseous, such that the smell of food aggravates your condition. Besides, the weakened condition caused by the cancer progression prevents extensive participation in such a “medical” regimen.

By: tmac57

tmac57 — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 12:56:29 +0000

HHC- I know many cancer patients who are either in treatment or are post treatment. I have never known any of them to be suicidal because of the treatment itself. Maybe your relative’s experience was not typical.

By: Joe

Joe — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 09:36:34 +0000

@HHC The Gonzo therapy is an arduous process. You can read an account here: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=97 Scoot down to “A Troubling Case History.” In short, one is occupied all day making vegetable juices, taking enemas, swallowing large numbers of pills, and cooking.

By: HHC

HHC — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 05:03:37 +0000

I had a close female and male relative both die from pancreatic cancer. They were lifelong smokers. A strong social support system kept them alive and coherent to the end of life. My female relative became suicidal with the cancer therapy. Is the Gonzalez treatment better than suicide, or a quick ends to the means of release from life’s pain?

By: Steven Novella

Steven Novella — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:15:46 +0000

corrections made – thanks