Positive Health Online

Baking Soda - Every Cancer Patient's Best Friend

by Mark Sircus Ac OMD

Cancer Cells have a Lower pH than Surrounding Tissue
As if it were not humiliating enough for orthodox oncologists to learn that the lowly chemical sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) is important in the treatment of cancer, now they have to swallow the research pointing to the fact that bicarbonate can also be used to diagnose cancer in its earliest stages. Oncologists do understand and know that bicarbonate is necessary to protect their patients from the toxicity and harm done by highly toxic chemicals used in chemotherapy. They also know it is of extraordinary help to patients receiving radiation treatments, protecting as it does the kidneys and other tissues of the body from radioactive damages.

Oncologists should also know that bicarbonate-induced extracellular alkalinization leads to significant improvements in the therapeutic effectiveness of certain chemo agents. A number of studies have shown that the extracellular pH in cancers is typically lower than that in normal tissue, and that an acidic pH promotes invasive tumour growth in primary and metastatic cancers. The external pH of solid tumours is acidic as a consequence of increased metabolism of glucose and poor perfusion. Acid pH has been shown to stimulate tumour cell invasion and metastasis in vitro and in cells before tail vein injection in vivo.

Researchers have investigated the very reasonable assumption that increased systemic concentrations of pH buffers would lead to reduced intratumoural and peritumoural acidosis, and as a result, inhibit malignant growth. It has been shown that increased serum concentrations of the sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO₃) can be achieved via oral intake. These researchers found that consequent reduction of tumour acid concentrations significantly reduces tumour growth and invasion without altering the pH of blood or normal tissues.[1]

Oral NaHCO₃ selectively increased the pH of tumours and reduced the formation of spontaneous metastases in mouse models of metastatic breast cancer. NaHCO₃ therapy also reduced the rate of lymph node involvement and significantly reduced the formation of hepatic metastases. Acid pH was shown to increase the release of active cathepsin B, an important matrix remodelling protease.[2]

We know that bicarbonate turns to CO2 easily when dissolved in water as it enters the stomach, but few know that cancerous tissue turns bicarbonate into carbon dioxide. A few years ago a United Kingdom Cancer Research team found MRI scans were able to track changes in bicarbonate and therefore identify cancers even in the very early stages.

All cancer has a lower pH, meaning it is more acidic than surrounding tissue. Working with mice, the researchers boosted the MRI sensitivity more than 20,000 times. Using MRI, they looked to see how much of the tagged bicarbonate was converted into carbon dioxide within the tumour. In more acidic tumours, more bicarbonate is converted into carbon dioxide.

Lead researcher Professor Kevin Brindle, from Cancer Research UK's Cambridge Research Institute at the University of Cambridge, said: "This technique could be used as a highly-sensitive early warning system for the signs of cancer. By exploiting the body's natural pH balancing system, we have found a potentially safe way of measuring pH to see what's going on inside patients. MRI can pick up on the abnormal pH levels found in cancer and it is possible that this could be used to pinpoint where the disease is present and when it is responding to treatment."

Special Note: In Sodium Bicarbonate - Rich Man's Poor Man's Cancer Treatment it is stressed that sodium bicarbonate is not a standalone single shot cancer treatment. It should always be used in conjunction with a full protocol that includes most importantly magnesium chloride, iodine and selenium plus a naturopathic approach to diet, intestinal cleaning, sun exposure and many other helpful things.

References

[1] Cancer Research 69, 2677, March 15, 2009. Published Online First March 10, 2009;
doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-2394.
[2] Cancer Res 69 (6):2260-8. 2009.

Mark Sircus Ac OMD
Director International Medical Veritas Association IMVA
http://publications.imva.info     
http://blog.imva.info   

Copyright (c) IMVA International Medical Veritas Association 2009 all rights reserved

---

US Court Rules in Favour of Free Speech on Selenium Health Claims:

Will this precedent influence European policy on health claims for foods and food supplements?

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lost its bid to overturn a health claim for selenium-containing dietary supplements on 31 May in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle ruled unconstitutional the FDA's censorship of selenium dietary supplement claims relating to the reduction of cancer risk. Jonathan Emord of Emord & Associates on behalf of the plaintiffs in the case, (including lead plaintiff Alliance for Natural Health USA (ANH-USA); Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw; and the Coalition to End FDA and FTC Censorship).

The verdict, unless reversed on appeal, protects the First Amendment right of dietary supplement manufacturers to provide "qualified health claims", which accurately communicate the state of science concerning dietary supplements. This is a remarkable seventh victory over the FDA by the Emord firm (six of which invalidated FDA health claim censorship).

The lawsuit was initiated last summer in response to the FDA's 19th June 2009 decision to suppress selenium/cancer-risk reduction claims. Ten of the claims (all appealed by the plaintiffs) were held unconstitutionally censored. The plaintiffs expressed their belief that this violated their right to communicate truthful health information to the public. The judge found that the FDA had denied claims despite credible evidence supporting them, and had thereby infringed on free speech.

Prior to this ruling the FDA required near conclusive scientific evidence for any nutrient claim. The judge ruled that so long as the claim is an accurate reflection of the state of science, the First Amendment protects it.

European policy on health claims for foods and food constituents has yet to be tested in court. Yet, the European food and natural product industries, as well as many consumers, are currently up in arms as the European Commission attempts to implement a law, the Nutrition & Health Claims Regulation (No 1924/2006), that aims to ban all health claims on food, food constituents or supplements - unless they are specifically approved by Europe's highest authority on food, the controversial European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Contrary to the US court verdict, EFSA is only approving claims based on conclusive evidence from studies on healthy human populations.

Commenting on the court decision and its possible impact on the European health claims environment, Robert Verkerk PhD, executive and scientific director of ANH International said, "The verdict in our case against the FDA should be sending shock waves across the Atlantic to EFSA. If European authorities implement the Nutrition and Health Claims Regulation as planned in 2011, it is the European consumer that will be the main loser. Disease prevention using good diets and nutrients will effectively be thrown out of the window. EFSA needs to either shift to using credible evidence as in the US, or it should expect to argue its case in the courts."

Verkerk added: "EFSA's rejections of hundreds of health claims is causing mayhem with the European food and supplement industry and a meeting of stakeholders on 1 June at its headquarters in Parma in Italy has been convened to discuss ways forward.

There are several reasons why EFSA is rejecting so many claims. Sometimes it's because the health relationship has only been studied in diseased populations. In other cases it's because the health benefits are so obvious that extensive clinical trials have not been justified. Other claims are being rejected simply through lack of adequate funds to support the very costly human research required to generate definitive conclusions. Scientific inference and common sense simply don't come into EFSA's equation."

It remains to be seen whether EFSA and the European Commission will successfully quash freedom of speech in relation to the health benefits of foods and food constituents. While human rights for Europeans have in theory been given greater legal protection under the newly passed Lisbon Treaty, these rights can be vetoed by unelected European institutions on public health or national security grounds.

ANH-Intl is calling on European citizens to raise their concerns with their duly elected Member of the European Parliament over how the Nutrition and Health Claims Regulation is likely to drastically reduce their ability to select healthy foods and nutrients.

About the Alliance for Natural Health

www.anhinterntional.org  
The Alliance for Natural Health USA is part of an international organisation, the Alliance for Natural Health International (ANH-Intl), dedicated to promoting natural, biocompatible and sustainable healthcare through the use of 'good science' and 'good law'.
Regional websites:
Alliance for Natural Health Europe - www.anh-europe.org  
Alliance for Natural Health USA - www.anh-usa.org  
About Emord & Associates PC - www.emord.com  
 

About Emord & Associates

Emord & Associates is an "AV" rated law firm (Martindale-Hubbell rating service) located at 1050 17th Street, N.W., Suite 600, Washington, D.C. 20036; 11808 Wolf Run Lane, Clifton, VA 20124; and 2730 S. Val Vista Drive Suite 117, Gilbert, AZ 85295. The firm represents over 450 dietary supplement designers, manufacturers and distributors; food manufacturers and distributors; scientists; physicians; nutritionists; health care associations; and citizen groups. The firm's attorneys represent clients in constitutional and administrative law cases before the Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Trade Commission, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Department of Justice, the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Federal Communications Commission.

Further Information

Alliance for Natural Health International
Sophie Middleton +44 1306 646 600
info@anhinternational.org  
www.anhinternational.org  
www.anhcampaign.org
or
Emord & Associates
Jonathan Emord 202.466.6937
jemord@emord.com
www.emord.com  

(c) Alliance for Natural Health, The Atrium, Curtis Road, Dorking, Surrey RH4 1XA, United Kingdom