You are hereIntravenous Vitamin C Outlawed By FDA Despite Effectively Treating Cancer Tumors

Intravenous Vitamin C Outlawed By FDA Despite Effectively Treating Cancer Tumors


By genebean - Posted on 17 January 2011

A Natural News article published in Jan 2011 (archived screenshot here) reports that the FDA is clamping down on injectable Vitamin C as a treatment for cancer. Also see this archived action alert.

Why are they doing this, even though the evidence shows that this is a safe and effective treatment for cancer? And why isn't this treatment option available in mainstream medicine other than the "slash, burn and poison" options for cancer?

Take a look at the findings below :

  • Effects of high dose ascorbate administration on L-10 tumor growth in guinea pigs
    PubMed link or archived screenshot here.
    "Ascorbate concentrations sufficient to kill tumor cells can be safely achieved in solid tumors in vivo, suggesting a possible role for high-dose intravenous ascorbate in treating cancer."
  • Intravenously administered vitamin C as cancer therapy: three cases
    PubMed link or archived screenshot here.
    "At concentrations above 1000 micromol/L, vitamin C is toxic to some cancer cells but not to normal cells in vitro." "In light of recent clinical pharmacokinetic findings and in vitro evidence of anti-tumour mechanisms, these case reports indicate that the role of high-dose intravenous vitamin C therapy in cancer treatment should be reassessed."
  • In-situ modulation of oxidative stress: a novel and efficient strategy to kill cancer cells
    PubMed link or archived screenshot here.
    "Indeed, the combination of vitamin C (which accumulates in hepatoma cells) and a quinone undergoing a redox cycling (vitamin K(3)) leads to an oxidative stress that kills cancer cells in a selective manner."
  • Orthomolecular Oncology Review: Ascorbic Acid and Cancer 25 Years Later
    Full article here.
    "The collective evidence supports the notion of increasing ascorbate intake in patients suffering malignancies, especially provided by intravenous route. Ascorbate may produce benefits in both prevention and treatment of cancer, by inhibiting malignant cell proliferation, and inducing differentiation and redifferentiation. In addition, ascorbate has been of value in the palliation of pain and as an ergogenic agent, which has substantially improved the quality of life of terminal cancer patients. The ideal anticancer agent is obviously one that specifically interferes with tumor growth, prolongs survival time, and improves quality of life. There is evidence that ascorbate might fit this description."
  • Reevaluation of ascorbate in cancer treatment: emerging evidence, open minds and serendipity
    PubMed link or archived screenshot here.
    "Recent data show that intravenous but not oral administration of ascorbate can produce millimolar plasma concentrations, which are toxic to many cancer cell lines. We propose that ascorbate treatment of cancer should be reexamined by rigorous scientific scrutiny in the light of new evidence."
  • High-dose vitamin C (ascorbic acid) therapy in the treatment of patients with advanced cancer
    PubMed link or archived screenshot here.
    "As research results concerning ascorbate pharmacokinetics and its mechanisms of action against tumor cells have been published, and as evidence from case studies has continued to mount that ascorbate therapy could be effective if the right protocols were used, interest among physicians and scientists has increased."

Consistent with "medicalspeak", they have to phrase their sentences in a noncommital manner -- words like "could", "should", "may" and "might" are used. Why can't conventional medicine ever be sure of anything, especially if something actually works in curing disease? Why the hesitation? (My guess : finding a cheap cure is destructive to professional livelihoods that profit from treating the disease.) It has been said that "there are more people today making a living out of cancer than are dying from it". Apparently "fear of reprisal" is not too uncommon within the medical community :

  • Deception, discrimination, and fear of reprisal: lessons in ethics from third-year medical students
    PubMed link or archived screenshot here.
    Third-year medical students "who described fear of speaking up perceived a tradeoff between academic survival and patients' interests".
  • What Can We Learn from Medical Whistleblowers?
    Visit article or archived screenshot here.
    "Whistleblowers have been compared to bees -- they have just one sting to use and using it may lead to career suicide. Many of the whistleblowers at the roundtable said they had experienced retaliation from their employers for raising concerns, but all had felt obligated to speak out about practices in medicine and medical research that they believe are risking the public's health or safety."
  • Did JAMA Editors Threaten a Big Pharma Whistleblower?
    Visit article or archived screenshot here.
    "The editors allegedly threatened Leo that if he did not stop talking to the press, they would ban him from the journal and ruin the reputation of his medical school."

The highly successful alternative cancer clinic, Oasis Of Hope Hospital in Mexico, uses Intravenous Vitamin C Therapy as part of their treatment regimen. They publish their success rates, are world-renowned, and have been healing cancer patients since 1963. Take a look at their page Alternative Cancer Options with Vitamin C or Interleukin-2 (archived screenshot). Excerpt follows :

  • "IRT-C exploits the discovery that, in very high concentrations achievable only by intravenous administration, vitamin C (ascorbate) can generate large amounts of potential cytotoxic free radicals that many cancers are selectively sensitive to, owing to a deficiency of antioxidant enzymes. By boosting tumor oxygenation and co-administering a catalytic form of vitamin K, the IRT-C regimen further amplifies the capacity of vitamin C to generate severe oxidative stress in tumors. The very good news about the IRT-C approach is that it does not harm normal healthy tissues, which have adequate antioxidant defenses; thus, IRT-C is virtually free of side effects."

Here is a well-reported case of intravenous Vitamin C saving a man dying from viral pneumonia (swine flu) : visit article or archived screenshot here. It is interesting to note that the doctors were reluctant to use this treatment, and later even wanted to stop it even though the patient was recovering quickly. Stopping the Vitamin C therapy caused the patient's condition to deteriorate again, and his family members had to convince the doctors to resume this treatment, leading to his full recovery. What is wrong with these doctors?

Vitamin C is definitely safe, as it is a water-soluble vitamin and the body gets rid of any excess that it doesn't need.

Why are they banning intravenous (injectable) Vitamin C when the evidence, from medical sources, shows that it actually works in treating cancer tumors, and safely too? Is it because it is a vitamin and not a drug? Could Mike Adams be right, in that Vitamin C cannot be patented and is therefore a threat to Big Pharma's profits? The dots definitely connect in this direction.

An update of the situation is here (archived screenshot, Jan 11 2011). "The FDA has gone through an internal process whereby they determined injectable vitamin C to be an unapproved drug."

Highly recommended further reading :



AddThis

share