Cancerand alternative medicine

Are there any medical research studies that support alternative therapy to treat cancer?

I have read a little about Johanna Budwig and the Budwig protocol but apart from that there is an abundance of information that I sift through but do not necessarily trust.
Looking for legitimate studies.
Thanks

[Paxiled]

There aren't any -- aren't any on allopathic therapy, either.  The first is impossible to verify.  Most natural programs don't give out their results, particularly since many of their patients have already gone through all that allopathic medicine has to offer and have been given up as incurable.  That's a pretty hard cohort to cure for anyone, and it skews the results.  Then there's the money issue -- lots of money in drugs and surgery and radiation, but little available to truly study an alternative approach that won't yield massive profits.  Which is why the studies on allopathic therapies, including chemo, radiation, etc., aren't all that reliable either.  Most of them are done by proprietary organizations or funded by them, and they don't really tell us enough about their failures.  For example, the standard for cancer cure is five year survival, but if you die of something other than cancer which may very well have been caused by the treatment it goes down as a successful treatment. If you get cancer again in the sixth year, again, a successful treatment.  If you get a different type of cancer or die of pneumonia from the treatment, again, a successful treatment.  Until the profit is out of funding of studies and results, it will be difficult to get truly great info which is why so many "settled" therapies are unsettled by further research a few years down the road.  So yes, there are "studies," but none that would meet the standards of peer review allopathic studies supposedly (but don't really) meet.  Not to mention there's a lot of charlatans out there especially since the onset of the internet.  Sometimes you just have to take a choice and hope.  Some therapies out there are ******, Wigmore, and many others, but again, the studies just don't have access to the money to do them optimally or with the appropriate patients.  Still, it's good to research these things and see what's available and make your own choices.  

[Paxiled]

There aren't any -- aren't any on allopathic therapy, either.  The first is impossible to verify.  Most natural programs don't give out their results, particularly since many of their patients have already gone through all that allopathic medicine has to offer and have been given up as incurable.  That's a pretty hard cohort to cure for anyone, and it skews the results.  Then there's the money issue -- lots of money in drugs and surgery and radiation, but little available to truly study an alternative approach that won't yield massive profits.  Which is why the studies on allopathic therapies, including chemo, radiation, etc., aren't all that reliable either.  Most of them are done by proprietary organizations or funded by them, and they don't really tell us enough about their failures.  For example, the standard for cancer cure is five year survival, but if you die of something other than cancer which may very well have been caused by the treatment it goes down as a successful treatment. If you get cancer again in the sixth year, again, a successful treatment.  If you get a different type of cancer or die of pneumonia from the treatment, again, a successful treatment.  Until the profit is out of funding of studies and results, it will be difficult to get truly great info which is why so many "settled" therapies are unsettled by further research a few years down the road.  So yes, there are "studies," but none that would meet the standards of peer review allopathic studies supposedly (but don't really) meet.  Not to mention there's a lot of charlatans out there especially since the onset of the internet.  Sometimes you just have to take a choice and hope.  Some therapies out there are ******, Wigmore, and many others, but again, the studies just don't have access to the money to do them optimally or with the appropriate patients.  Still, it's good to research these things and see what's available and make your own choices.  

[Paxiled]

Don't know why they censored G-e-r-s-o-n, a therapy based on juicing and cleansing.

[rivll]

Thanks Paxiled. What you say is true about studies for profit. It is unfortunate.
I think Johanna Budwig had some studies in Germany with her protocol. The problem I have with her is that she was adamantly opposed to taking supplements and so much has come out recently about the benefits of anti oxidants and anti inflammatories that I am not sure it is the best choice.
I will look into ****** as well. I think I read somewhere that he includes supplements in his diet.

[Paxiled]

If you juice enough you probably don't need supplements, because juicing allows you to get an intense number of antioxidants in your system from food.  So maybe that's the reason she has against supplements.  Some day, people will wake up and put their money where honest results are, but we're not going to get there in my lifetime.

[goose21300]

There are some studies that theorize cancer coming from the toxins/ waste  of  fungi.  If I remember correctly, a high-acidic & low oxygen environment in the body opens the door for dormant viruses and bacteria to "wake up".  I don't remember how fungi is introduced (if it's already present but dormant in the body) but when it is in the body it may feed on the waste from bacteria & viruses causing it to spread faster. And the toxins from the fungi cause the cell mutation/ cancer.  So basically, shallow breathing and diets that create a high acidity pH in the body can lead the way to cancer.  That is the theory anyway.  Dr. Jerry Tennant has written about this.  It's kind of interesting.  I don't know that the study supports alternative healing as a help/ cure but the theories for healing in tennant's book are the alternative medicine form and he brings up many of the same points that Paxiled has.