Re: Kelley / Gonzales Cancer Treatment fraud

Discussion in 'Food and nutrition' started by [email protected], Jan 23, 2005.

  1. >(I don't have access the full article) Interesting but they administer the
    >enzyme preparations with feed.
    >Would the enzymes not interact with the proteins in the feed, or self digest
    >this casts doubt on the conclusions of the experiment?
    >Also they use small doses - Dr Gonzalez uses extremely high doses - > 45g
    >away from meals.

    I don't see if food or water makes a difference. The mice had it in
    water, surely they didn't stop eating during the test. Enzymes are large
    proteines and they like other proteins are broken into quite small
    proteins or the basic amino acids in digestion so amount is not relevant.
    If they drank alot they broke down alot or passed them from the gut if
    absorption was overwhealmed.

    >Why do you think this, they had 2 randomised groups of rodents with PC, one
    >group the enzyme group lived significantly longer than the other?

    If I rub enzymes on my skin and get relief from joint pain I can say with
    great certainity that the relief didn't come from doing so because they
    can not pass through the skin because again the proteins are too large.
    This is why for example insulin can not now be used by the skin patch
    method, the insulin protein is too large.
    >Also why do you ignore the article I posted showing that Bromelain is
    >absorbed into the plasma from oral preparations, this clearly shows that
    >Bromelain (an enzyme) is indeed absorbed intact?

    Forgive me, I didn't see that, repost please.

    >(The study on Dr Kelley's patients would never be accepted as science
    >because it's uncontrolled, however to produce so many cures it seems
    >irrational to dismiss them because they are not 'science')
    >I understand the limitations of the work as it is now, however the pilot
    >study was promising although not randomised and also small.
    >I am not aware of any mainstream study however small and biased which can
    >replicate these results.

    Given what I read about Gonzales I must in the first instance question his
    source of reliable information. To be blunt, why should we believe them
    when for too many of such folk on the fringes of demonstrated and
    confirmed science have been found lacking in this area. But we not rely
    on them, the trial now underway should provide a better picture, and even
    then it will have to be replicated before it has a chance of being

    >Why does the rodent study fail the enzyme absorption test?
    >If you have 2 randomised groups they should live the same time if they are
    >receiving no treatment.
    >There was a marked difference in life span between the 2 groups of mice, so
    >if the enzymes were not absorbed then what other rational would you say lead
    >to the increased survival?.

    From what is in the abstract, they did not demonstrate that enzymes
    originating from the external source appeared in the blood. See the pig
    and my skin example above. If this can be replicated by others then they
    will start to look at what effect the mixture has on other parts of
    metabolism or other parts of the bodies reactions to substances consumed.
    As in the case of insulin, it is first stimulated by food in the gut
    before glucose even starts to rise in the blood. If it can be shown that
    the course of cancer can be affected then it will be fine but the theory
    on which kelly/Gonzalesbase their claims will have to be abandoned as

  2. Anth

    Anth Guest

    The crux of the theory is that around the cancer cell is HCG, this carries a
    charge which repels the killer cells.
    The amylase attacks the sugar molecule on the HCG and the
    trypsin/chymorypsin dissolves the protein part.
    Without the HCG coating the cell is vulnerable to attack by the immune
    system and it wiped out.

    <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]