Cancer will always be with us, according to more recent research

[Mr.Savage]

I just want to point out to anyone reading this thread, that by no means should you ever just compound and use your own DMSO, or use DMSO off-label in general.

Please think for yourselves, and consider that someone might hold passionate beliefs rooted in delusions.

OT: OP needs to read this, stat: http://quillette.com/2016/02/15/the-unbearable-asymmetry-of-bullshit/

I read every word, and it was like looking in a mirror. Seriously, though, that is a cracking good read which articulates a point of view I very much agree with.

By all means, don't take my word about DMSO, or anything else, for that matter. Do your own research.

But consider this: DMSO is used mostly as a liniment on race horses. These horses are worth a fortune. If DMSO harmed the animal in any way, it would never be used by Vets, who've been applying it to lame horses since the mid '60s. If properly used, DMSO presents no danger, and can do a world of good.

DMSO is a tangible example of how capitalism does indeed hinder innovation.

 

[rcs619]

By all means, don't take my word about DMSO, or anything else, for that matter. Do your own research.

But consider this: DMSO is used mostly as a liniment on race horses. These horses are worth a fortune. If DMSO harmed the animal in any way, it would never be used by Vets, who've been applying it to lame horses since the mid '60s. If properly used, DMSO presents no danger, and can do a world of good.

DMSO is a tangible example of how capitalism does indeed hinder innovation.

They're also *horses*.

Different animals, even relatively closely-related animals like mammals, do have differences in their internal chemistry and in what kinds of medicines, treatments and chemicals they can tolerate. Horses are even more different from humans than something like dogs or cats, being obligate herbivores who rely on hindgut fermentation.

Human medicine and veterinary medicine do share some things, but there's a very good reason that we *only* use certain medicines, and certain treatments on animals.

 

[P. K. Qu'est Que Ce]

I just want to point out to anyone reading this thread, that by no means should you ever just compound and use your own DMSO, or use DMSO off-label in general.

Please think for yourselves, and consider that someone might hold passionate beliefs rooted in delusions.

OT: OP needs to read this, stat: http://quillette.com/2016/02/15/the-unbearable-asymmetry-of-bullshit/

I read every word, and it was like looking in a mirror. Seriously, though, that is a cracking good read which articulates a point of view I very much agree with.

By all means, don't take my word about DMSO, or anything else, for that matter. Do your own research.

But consider this: DMSO is used mostly as a liniment on race horses. These horses are worth a fortune. If DMSO harmed the animal in any way, it would never be used by Vets, who've been applying it to lame horses since the mid '60s. If properly used, DMSO presents no danger, and can do a world of good.

DMSO is a tangible example of how capitalism does indeed hinder innovation.

I don't see how using veterinary medicines in humans could possibly be a problem. Why, PCP has such a perfect track record in humans, right? In fact, why do we waste all of this time, money, and energy on model species when we could just be using horse medicines?! Not to mention that the standard of care for horses is just... so much lower than humans. You want your horse to perform for a few years, then they go to stud. If they go stud limping, with 5 years shaved off their original 20-35 years? So what, that's not a profit issue.

It's just... You just... you're probably going to kill yourself, which is absolutely fine, but don't give literally criminal (not to say stupid) advice to people on an open forum.

By the way, what IS this forum's policy on its members endorsing the use of off-label Rx medication? Off-label VETERINARY medication? I would hope that it would be a strict policy.

 

[Mr.Savage]

By all means, don't take my word about DMSO, or anything else, for that matter. Do your own research.

But consider this: DMSO is used mostly as a liniment on race horses. These horses are worth a fortune.

They're also *horses*.

Human medicine and veterinary medicine do share some things, but there's a very good reason that we *only* use certain medicines, and certain treatments on animals.

Certainly, but the literature shows DMSO to be an order of magnitude safer that many synthetic drugs which were approved, then later proved unsafe and hastily withdrawn from the market.

Most of all though, in no way does it perform as some miracle substance, any more than colloidal silver is the miracle antibiotic/antiviral.

This statement about silver is incongruent with scientific findings:

https://www.academia.edu/2339722/An...ynthesized_by_fungal_strain_Aspergillus_niger

 

[P. K. Qu'est Que Ce]

By all means, don't take my word about DMSO, or anything else, for that matter. Do your own research.

But consider this: DMSO is used mostly as a liniment on race horses. These horses are worth a fortune.

They're also *horses*.

Human medicine and veterinary medicine do share some things, but there's a very good reason that we *only* use certain medicines, and certain treatments on animals.

Certainly, but the literature shows DMSO to be an order of magnitude safer that many synthetic drugs which were approved, then later proved unsafe and hastily withdrawn from the market.

Most of all though, in no way does it perform as some miracle substance, any more than colloidal silver is the miracle antibiotic/antiviral.

This statement about silver is incongruent with scientific findings:

https://www.academia.edu/2339722/An...ynthesized_by_fungal_strain_Aspergillus_niger

I've never had to actually use that seriously, but you are a special case.

 

[Mr.Savage]

It's just... You just... you're probably going to kill yourself, which is absolutely fine, but don't this literally criminal (not to say stupid) advice to people on an open forum.

Heavens, if DMSO were a lethal substance, I'd surely have perished 15 years ago, as I practically bathe in the stuff. By the way, DMSO isn't officially approved for use in animals either, it's simply that Veterinarians are not bound by the same strictures as MDs, so they use whatever works for them.

Another name for DMSO is "tree juice" as it is derived from the substance known as Lignin, the cellulosic fiber found in most plant life.

But the oceans of the world produce DMSO naturally, here is a fascinating article about DMSO's role in climate change: http://planetearth.nerc.ac.uk/features/story.aspx?id=1099&cookieConsent=A

 

[rcs619]

Certainly, but the literature shows DMSO to be an order of magnitude safer that many synthetic drugs which were approved, then later proved unsafe and hastily withdrawn from the market.

So even a cursory shows that the FDA *has* approved DMSO for human use in select circumstances.

The FDA has approved DMSO as a prescription medication for treating symptoms of painful bladder syndrome. It's also used under medical supervision to treat several other conditions, including shingles.

DMSO is easily absorbed by the skin. It's sometimes used to increase the body's absorption of other medications.

DMSO is available without a prescription most often in gel or cream form. It can be purchased in health food stores, by mail order, and on the Internet.

While it can sometimes be found as an oral supplement, its safety is unclear. DMSO is primarily used by applying it to the skin.

I'm assuming you get yours from a vet because you don't approve of the limitations and/or it's cheaper than going to a health food stores (which is definitely risky, since I'm assuming the concentration for horses is different than what you might want to use on humans).

Other than its use as a prescription medicine, there is little or no scientific evidence to support other claims made about DMSO's effectiveness.

The American Cancer Society says there is no evidence to support the use of DMSO to treat cancer. Using it that way could cause serious delays in getting proper and effective treatment.

A recent analysis of studies on the use of DMSO to relieve osteoarthritis pain found that it was not significantly more effective than placebo in relieving joint pain.

There are no studies that provide guidelines for determining the proper dose of DMSO. The gel used to treat osteoarthritis typically has a concentration of 25%. It is applied three or four times a day. But DMSO sold without a prescription can range from 10% concentration to 90%.

As far as the risks go, they've found that some of the DMSO sold outside of prescription circumstances actually contains impurities. Which, given how DMSO allows almost anything to be absorbed through the skin with it, can get into the user and potentially cause damage.

DMSO can also dramatically increase the effects of certain medicines like blood thinners, steroids, sedatives and heart medications, which can lead to serious health issues. And to close...

The biggest concern of DMSO as a solvent is that when it gets on the skin it will cause anything on the skin to be absorbed. So be sure to wash your hands and skin well before using.

Pregnant women and women who are breastfeeding should not use DMSO, since little is known about its possible effects on the fetus or infant.

You should also not use DMSO without talking to your doctor if you have:

Diabetes
Asthma
Liver, kidney, or heart conditions

Always keep in mind that supplements are not regulated by the FDA.

That last part honestly scares me the most. They can put damned near anything in it, and due to the nature of DMSO, it's going straight through your skin and into your body.

Do we have any tabletop gamers here. Wasn't DMSO the chemical in Shadowrun that let anything be absorbed directly through the skin? If not, it sounds pretty similar, lol.

ADDENDUM: It totally *is* the stuff from Shadowrun. Oh wow. The following video is super-relevant.

 

[P. K. Qu'est Que Ce]

It's just... You just... you're probably going to kill yourself, which is absolutely fine, but don't this literally criminal (not to say stupid) advice to people on an open forum.

Heavens, if DMSO were a lethal substance, I'd surely have perished 15 years ago, as I practically bathe in the stuff. ---

No. We're not playing this game, although I know how much cranks, be they medical, scientific, or political love to hold forth. I'm not your audience. I'm just the person letting everyone else know that you're giving them potentially dangerous advice. I do not care about what you personally believe, and I don't about about what you do to yourself. Klar?

Certainly, but the literature shows DMSO to be an order of magnitude safer that many synthetic drugs which were approved, then later proved unsafe and hastily withdrawn from the market.

So even a cursory shows that the FDA *has* approved DMSO for human use in select circumstances.

The FDA has approved DMSO as a prescription medication for treating symptoms of painful bladder syndrome. It's also used under medical supervision to treat several other conditions, including shingles.

DMSO is easily absorbed by the skin. It's sometimes used to increase the body's absorption of other medications.

DMSO is available without a prescription most often in gel or cream form. It can be purchased in health food stores, by mail order, and on the Internet.

While it can sometimes be found as an oral supplement, its safety is unclear. DMSO is primarily used by applying it to the skin.

I'm assuming you get yours from a vet because you don't approve of the limitations and/or it's cheaper than going to a health food stores (which is definitely risky, since I'm assuming the concentration for horses is different than what you might want to use on humans).

Other than its use as a prescription medicine, there is little or no scientific evidence to support other claims made about DMSO's effectiveness.

The American Cancer Society says there is no evidence to support the use of DMSO to treat cancer. Using it that way could cause serious delays in getting proper and effective treatment.

A recent analysis of studies on the use of DMSO to relieve osteoarthritis pain found that it was not significantly more effective than placebo in relieving joint pain.

There are no studies that provide guidelines for determining the proper dose of DMSO. The gel used to treat osteoarthritis typically has a concentration of 25%. It is applied three or four times a day. But DMSO sold without a prescription can range from 10% concentration to 90%.

As far as the risks go, they've found that some of the DMSO sold outside of prescription circumstances actually contains impurities. Which, given how DMSO allows almost anything to be absorbed through the skin with it, can get into the user and potentially cause damage.

DMSO can also dramatically increase the effects of certain medicines like blood thinners, steroids, sedatives and heart medications, which can lead to serious health issues. And to close...

The biggest concern of DMSO as a solvent is that when it gets on the skin it will cause anything on the skin to be absorbed. So be sure to wash your hands and skin well before using.

Pregnant women and women who are breastfeeding should not use DMSO, since little is known about its possible effects on the fetus or infant.

You should also not use DMSO without talking to your doctor if you have:

Diabetes
Asthma
Liver, kidney, or heart conditions

Always keep in mind that supplements are not regulated by the FDA.

That last part honestly scares me the most. They can put damned near anything in it, and due to the nature of DMSO, it's going straight through your skin and into your body.

Do we have any tabletop gamers here. Wasn't DMSO the chemical in Shadowrun that let anything be absorbed directly through the skin? If not, it sounds pretty similar, lol.

That's the one. Dab a little on you, and you taste garlic. It's a fairly disturbing experience if you're remotely sane.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Do we have any tabletop gamers here. Wasn't DMSO the chemical in Shadowrun that let anything be absorbed directly through the skin? If not, it sounds pretty similar, lol.

In the old editions it was. They may have changed it.

Another name for DMSO is "tree juice" as it is derived from the substance known as Lignin, the cellulosic fiber found in most plant life.

But the oceans of the world produce DMSO naturally, here is a fascinating article about DMSO's role in climate change: http://planetearth.nerc.ac.uk/features/story.aspx?id=1099&cookieConsent=A

Seriously? You're going to pull the natural card?

 

[P. K. Qu'est Que Ce]

Do we have any tabletop gamers here. Wasn't DMSO the chemical in Shadowrun that let anything be absorbed directly through the skin? If not, it sounds pretty similar, lol.

In the old editions it was. They may have changed it.

Another name for DMSO is "tree juice" as it is derived from the substance known as Lignin, the cellulosic fiber found in most plant life.

But the oceans of the world produce DMSO naturally, here is a fascinating article about DMSO's role in climate change: http://planetearth.nerc.ac.uk/features/story.aspx?id=1099&cookieConsent=A

Seriously? You're going to pull the natural card?

Seriously! Now here, drink your 100% Natural non-GMO certified organic Hemlock juice. Don't worry, it hasn't killed me yet, and neither has all of this heroin, so you'll be fine!

 

[Mr.Savage]

I've never had to actually use that seriously, but you are a special case.

I'm honored, truly. But it begs the question: whose references are actually valid?


Put another way, this discussion has largely consisted of my introducing data which is popularly considered erroneous, and the rest of you, driven by flashes of indignation at the mere suggestion that things aren't entirely on the level, have made efforts to prove my data as the hogwash it is, if not to me, then certainly to each other and any poor souls who might read all this garbage and be moved to investigate.

I charge that medicine is largely profit driven, and even point to its past behavior that couldn't be considered ethical in any circumstance. Yet you all dismiss this as water under the bridge: "leave the past in the past and look ahead, for great things are on the horizon."

-- COMMERCIAL INFLUENCES IN RESEARCH --

Quite as important as increasing profits, for drug manufacturers, is avoidance of loss or elimination of competition. For this purpose medical research or its publication often must be suppressed. The censorship of medical news in the press, that has been jointly established by organized medicine and social service, is quite effective in supp1essing the work of the independent
research worker; and the subsidized worker is readily held in check when his results conflict with commercial interests.

Please think for yourselves, and consider that someone might hold passionate beliefs rooted in delusions.

Here, here!

 

[P. K. Qu'est Que Ce]

I've never had to actually use that seriously, but you are a special case.

I'm honored, truly. But it begs the question: whose references are actually valid?

No it doesn't, and that's not what "Begging the question" means.

 

[DefunctTheory]

I charge that medicine is largely profit driven, and even point to its past behavior that couldn't be considered ethical in any circumstance. Yet you all dismiss this as water under the bridge: "leave the past in the past and look ahead, for great things are on the horizon."

No. You charge that medicine is practiced by mustache twirling villains that are seemingly pulled out of the old Captain Planet cartoon, who are so powerful that they can prevent the research, development, and marketing of treatments, even when those treatments...

1. Are older then the current medical establishment
2. Have, in fact, been tested and found wanting
3. Are, in fact, used by the medical profession
4. Are so cheap and trivial that anyone with a basic understanding of scientific and medical testing could prove the effectiveness of the treatment with minimal effort

And we, as people who don't believe in conspiracy theories, are laughing as you fail, consistently, to provide any proof in anything you've said, continually spitting out quotes and documentaries that are old enough to rent ultra-porn that were questionable when they were written/spoken/taped, and have faired no better in age.

And honestly, I don't know why you expected anything different. You used Vitamin C megadoses as an example of a treatment that's been put down by conspiracy. Anti-vaxxers don't even believe that, and if you can't convince an anti-vaxxer of it, it's frankly insulting you'd think we'd fall for it.

 

[Mr.Savage]

Seriously? You're going to pull the natural card?

Not really, but that is why DMSO will never be profitable, hence, no attempt to approve for general use.

I'm assuming you get yours from a vet because you don't approve of the limitations and/or it's cheaper than going to a health food stores (which is definitely risky, since I'm assuming the concentration for horses is different than what you might want to use on humans).

As far as the risks go, they've found that some of the DMSO sold outside of prescription circumstances actually contains impurities. Which, given how DMSO allows almost anything to be absorbed through the skin with it, can get into the user and potentially cause damage.

Quite right, I purchase it by the gallon jug, and accompanying each shipment is a certificate of analysis verifying purity.

I take it one step further, however, and use a small tabletop device of my own construction which is patterned after the embodiment in a clever patent, and involves alternately freezing (which occurs at 65 degrees Fahrenheit) and thawing DMSO while washing it with activated carbon.

This not only removes any possible impurities, but the disagreeable garlic odor, as well.

Always keep in mind that supplements are not regulated by the FDA.

That last part honestly scares me the most. They can put damned near anything in it, and due to the nature of DMSO, it's going straight through your skin and into your body.

Indeed, that's why I insist on a copy of the Certificate of Analysis.

Do we have any tabletop gamers here. Wasn't DMSO the chemical in Shadowrun that let anything be absorbed directly through the skin? If not, it sounds pretty similar, lol.

ADDENDUM: It totally *is* the stuff from Shadowrun. Oh wow. The following video is super-relevant.

Okay... That is genuinely wicked. I've only ever played the two game console versions of Shadowrun, and don't recall it from that.

That's really interesting.

 

[Mr.Savage]

No. You charge that medicine is practiced by mustache twirling villains that are seemingly pulled out of the old Captain Planet cartoon, who are so powerful that they can prevent the research, development, and marketing of treatments, even when those treatments...

1. Are older then the current medical establishment

Has human physiology changed significantly in the interim?

2. Have, in fact, been tested and found wanting

Most still await testing.

3. Are, in fact, used by the medical profession

You mean DMSO? They don't do much with it.

4. Are so cheap and trivial that anyone with a basic understanding of scientific and medical testing could prove the effectiveness of the treatment with minimal effort

That is the very crux of the problem. It takes on average 12 years and over US$350 million to get a new drug from the laboratory onto the pharmacy shelf.

If something cheap and trivial is found effective, why would a drug company waste all that time and money to prove something so cheap works so well?

you fail, consistently, to provide any proof in anything you've said.

If historical public record in the form of news broadcasts, and quotes from both congressional and medical studies aren't acceptable, then I don't know what you'd call proof.

And honestly, I don't know why you expected anything different. You used Vitamin C megadoses as an example of a treatment that's been put down by conspiracy.

It wasn't put down, the findings of Dr. Fred Klenner, MD, were simply ignored by his peers, who were more interested in using iron-lungs.

Why does medicine ignore the findings of one of their own veterans?

Anti-vaxxers don't even believe that, and if you can't convince an anti-vaxxer of it, it's frankly insulting you'd think we'd fall for it.

Again we turn to public record, this time, of more recent occurrence:

How is the following material questionable?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twUVWv0fpRc


Why are doctors saying these things?:

 

[Azrael the Cat]

Of course cancer will always be with us. Now that Michael Bay's films are on the internet, you just can't get rid of them.

 

[deadish]

"The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory, is that conspiracy theorists believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is actually chaotic. The truth is that it is not The Iluminati, or The Jewish Banking Conspiracy, or the Gray Alien Theory.

The truth is far more frightening - Nobody is in control.

The world is rudderless."

- Alan Moore

 

[K12]

Bloody hell this thread is still going!

How is the following material questionable?

Easily. Any evidence is questionable and generally best questioned by people who are actually experts in physiology rather than some random guys and gals on a video game forum.

I understand why people dislike "big pharma" because there seems to be something fundamentally discomforting about large companies making money from people's sickness (plus many pharmaceutical companies do have some shady practices like dishonest marketing and ignoring conditions that affect third-world populations that can't profit from)

A lot of the research that you're saying hasn't been done could be performed by universities without pharmaceutical companies needing a look in. This isn't developing a new drug and plotting a safe dose and dose-response curve and the measuring of side-effects wouldn't be necessary for a simple observational study. If people are taking this stuff already you could easily do a relatively cheap cohort study.

Evidence is not the plural of anecdote (even if they are being said by someone with letters in front of their name) you need to have an actual statistical method to work from which don't use surrogate outcomes (like cancerous cells in a test-tube dying when something is squirted on to them)

 

[Mr.Savage]

conspiracy theorists believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting.

- Alan Moore

I would argue that conspiracy is misapplied in this instance. It's just a business model. The earlier accusation of my painting this picture of evil scientists and doctors wringing their hands greedily and twirling their moustaches is a bit of a stretch.

Everyone is simply a product of their education. The same holds true to for the Medical sector.

Bloody hell this thread is still going!

How is the following material questionable?

Easily. Any evidence is questionable and generally best questioned by people who are actually experts in physiology rather than some random guys and gals on a video game forum.

I agree, but the majority of experts have historically shown little interest in something that doesn't originate with them. There are a select few experts who've looked into it only to earn the scorn of their peers. This tends to discourage further investigation.

The peer-review process has a lot to do with shutting down lines of inquiry which have shown much promise, but the peer-review process is a rather sacred cow, so there is little hope for change.

I understand why people dislike "big pharma" because there seems to be something fundamentally discomforting about large companies making money from people's sickness (plus many pharmaceutical companies do have some shady practices like dishonest marketing and ignoring conditions that affect third-world populations that can't profit from)

Again, there exists a sort of "Stockholm Syndrome" amongst many people who at one turn will concede that money is the end game, but then insist the situation is win-win for all of us at day's end.

A lot of the research that you're saying hasn't been done could be performed by universities without pharmaceutical companies needing a look in. This isn't developing a new drug and plotting a safe dose and dose-response curve and the measuring of side-effects wouldn't be necessary for a simple observational study. If people are taking this stuff already you could easily do a relatively cheap cohort study.

Agreed wholeheartedly. This could be done at any time, but it isn't.

[Evidence is not the plural of anecdote (even if they are being said by someone with letters in front of their name) you need to have an actual statistical method to work from which don't use surrogate outcomes (like cancerous cells in a test-tube dying when something is squirted on to them)

This also suggests individual experience can only be deceptive.

By way of example, I have personally replicated the results of Royal Rife by subjecting bacterial cultures to the exact same techniques outlined in this video:



You would say my own tests prove nothing, partly because you weren't standing next to me while the experiment took place. Even if you were present during the test, you would likely maintain that neither of us are experts in the field, thus we aren't qualified to properly interpret the results we witness under the microscope.

We might both agree that something is happening on the slide, but you would remain skeptical.

Where does that leave us?

Once you have a plurality of anecdotes from many individuals, what more is required to prompt a rigorous examination with statistical methods?

It took a very long time for Medicine to come 'round to the idea that Ascorbic Acid would cure scurvy. Before that, it was either denounced or ignored outright.


But again, I personally do not believe in conspiracies. I do hold that Modern Medicine is not immune to greed and avarice.