Latest / Intellectual Medicine / Radiation for Prostate Cancer? Here's Why You Should Just Say No

Transcript

Radiation for Prostate Cancer? Here's Why You Should Just Say No · Intellectual Medicine

• 0:00
  The only thing we have that we can control, that we can count
• 0:03
  on, is our vitality, our strength, our virility, our
• 0:09
  brain, our heart, how we Live Today.
• 0:14
  Odds are that at some point we're going to die.
• 0:17
  It doesn't mean, however, that we can defer that consequence by
• 0:21
  some radiotherapy that'll guarantee to corrode the moment
• 0:26
  at hand with no back end benefit.
• 0:34
  Radiation therapy. What's the cut off with your
• 0:38
  PSA? When should it be considered?
• 0:42
  What are its advantages and disadvantages?
• 0:45
  We're going to dive into that and I'm going to tell you my
• 0:48
  thoughts and opinion built on research and the articles will
• 0:51
  be there for you to peruse. We always have to put this in
• 0:55
  the context of the medical industrial complex.
• 1:00
  There's a huge anomaly that is plaguing prostate cancer
• 1:04
  treatment. They can't figure out a way
• 1:07
  around it, so they ignore it. What PSA level should trigger
• 1:13
  consideration of radiation therapy?
• 1:16
  All right, I'll. I'm not going to keep you in
• 1:19
  suspense. Maybe I should.
• 1:21
  All right, I'll tell you. You should never consider
• 1:23
  radiation therapy. I'm going to explain why, and
• 1:26
  we're going to look at the PSA levels.
• 1:29
  How should you be reacting to them?
• 1:33
  You know, somewhere poor Doctor Albin is spinning in his grave.
• 1:37
  He published the book in 2014, The Great Prostate Hoax.
• 1:42
  He's the man who discovered the prostate specific antigen.
• 1:46
  At the time of discovery, he predicted that they would figure
• 1:50
  out a way to misuse the test PSA to scare men to do expensive,
• 1:59
  needless, harmful treatments. Drive them in like lemming off
• 2:03
  the Cliff, baby. Drive you into this treatment.
• 2:07
  It's terrifying and these doctors amplify fear.
• 2:10
  Oh my God, your PSA is filled in the blank.
• 2:14
  We're going to fill in the blank for you in a minute.
• 2:16
  Fill in the blank. You must get a biopsy.
• 2:19
  You must do treatment. We have to nip this in the bud.
• 2:22
  We have to get it early. No, we don't.
• 2:26
  We do not. The evidence does not support
• 2:29
  any of that. Let's take a look at the
• 2:32
  Seminole study, the PROTECT T trial, early stage prostate
• 2:36
  cancer, the cancer that should have been most curable.
• 2:41
  Removing the gland in the early stage should have cured the
• 2:44
  disease, correct? I mean, if you don't have a
• 2:46
  prostate, how can you die from prostate cancer?
• 2:49
  You can die from prostate cancer because it is plausible.
• 2:52
  Let me be cautious with my language.
• 2:54
  It's possible that current treatments, biopsies, mucking
• 3:00
  around with a gland, disrupt cancer cells and make metastatic
• 3:04
  disease and ultimately death from prostate cancer even more
• 3:09
  likely. That's a bold statement, but we
• 3:11
  need a new hypothesis, folks. The theory that prostate cancer
• 3:16
  should be assessed and diagnosed early in order to cure it has
• 3:20
  not held up. Those studies were so
• 3:24
  compelling. The fact that, number one, I've
• 3:28
  yet to hear of a patient share with me that their urologist or
• 3:33
  their oncologist squared up and said to them, well, you know, we
• 3:37
  could take your gland out. You'll become impotent in all
• 3:41
  likelihood. Let me square that up.
• 3:43
  Yeah, 95% likelihood. And oh, by the way, a high
• 3:46
  chance you'll be leaking here and the rest of your life.
• 3:48
  And just for good measure, we're going to probably want to
• 3:52
  irradiate you and then castrate you.
• 3:54
  But, you know, have a nice life. Oh, by the way, I must inform
• 3:58
  you that none of these treatments have been shown to
• 4:01
  make a difference regarding the likelihood that you'll die from
• 4:04
  prostate cancer. So you get to do all that and
• 4:07
  then what? Die from prostate cancer?
• 4:10
  Anyhow, that's an honest reflection of the study.
• 4:15
  It's not shared. This gets ignored when there's a
• 4:18
  compelling evidence, an anomalous outcome that just
• 4:22
  rupture entire paradigm of treatment.
• 4:24
  The entire urological paradigm has been blown apart.
• 4:27
  They just have not acknowledged it.
• 4:30
  That's why I'm here. That's why you're there.
• 4:33
  What we really want is not dogma.
• 4:35
  We do not want right. The domino effect down the road.
• 4:41
  These consults typically last couple of minutes.
• 4:43
  Oh, your PSA is elevated. Yeah.
• 4:44
  We got a biopsy. We'll set up next week and then
• 4:47
  we'll torch you beyond that. Dalton is a great chemist.
• 4:52
  He had a breakthrough in his thought process and discovery
• 4:56
  that affected chemistry forever. But Dalton wasn't a chemist at
• 5:01
  the outset. He was studying weather, but he
• 5:04
  could look at the problems from a different perspective.
• 5:07
  I perceive myself in a similar role.
• 5:09
  I'm not a urologist. I'm not an oncologist.
• 5:11
  I wasn't bred with their paradigm.
• 5:15
  For 15 years I've been looking at this from the outside, saying
• 5:18
  what are we doing? What's going on?
• 5:20
  So what? Why do I say radiation should
• 5:23
  never be done? All right, let's start with that
• 5:27
  Protect T trial men who are radiated no decrease in death
• 5:32
  from prostate cancer compared to men who did nothing after 15
• 5:36
  years. So why would you subject
• 5:39
  yourself to radiation for no net gain?
• 5:43
  Ironically, the the the reason they do the radiation supports
• 5:48
  my hypothesis. My premise that cancer is
• 5:52
  disseminated at a cellular level, so they'll do radiation.
• 5:55
  It's called adjuvant radiation. Here's another study that
• 5:58
  highlights my point. Adjuvant radiation means they
• 6:01
  whack out your prostate gland and then as soon as you recover
• 6:05
  from the surgery, they ZAP you with radiation.
• 6:09
  The theory is, well, you know, there might have been some stray
• 6:11
  cancer cells. We're going to kill them as if
• 6:14
  they stayed in the pelvis waiting to be irradiated.
• 6:17
  That's dumb. They disseminate.
• 6:21
  So the irradiation happened. There was a study that was
• 6:24
  published looking at men who had adjuvant radiation, meaning
• 6:28
  right after surgery, and they compare them to men who didn't
• 6:31
  do it. They waited until the PSA began
• 6:35
  to rise, then they had what they call salvage radiation therapy.
• 6:40
  Right? The fact that even the term
• 6:42
  exists tells you the lack of benefit of the first treatment.
• 6:46
  But nevertheless, in this study, adjuvant versus salvage.
• 6:49
  Salvage could have happened years later.
• 6:52
  No difference in disease free survival.
• 6:56
  No difference. Now I maintain if they had had a
• 6:59
  third group that never did radiation, there would still be
• 7:03
  no difference and you would spare yourself the negative
• 7:07
  consequence. We're talking radiation
• 7:09
  proctitis. 7% still significant. Had blood with pooping radiation
• 7:16
  proctitis. I believe that's underreported.
• 7:19
  Sometimes this radiation proctitis happens years later
• 7:23
  after the patient has left the urologist and they're back in
• 7:26
  the family doctor's office. I've had patients like this
• 7:28
  appear in my practice. 10 years, 15 years later, they're leaking
• 7:34
  stool. It's bloody.
• 7:36
  No good treatment for that. Oh, by the way, it did you no
• 7:40
  good regarding survival, but now you got a little reminder that
• 7:43
  it happened. How about, how about if you put
• 7:45
  the seeds in there? You know, those radioactive
• 7:47
  seeds? There are a dozen different ways
• 7:52
  that the medical industrial complex has tried to convince us
• 7:56
  that they could do this in a safer manner.
• 8:00
  I beg to differ. Safe radiation is like healthy
• 8:05
  arsenic. It's a matter of potency,
• 8:07
  degree, and ultimately a lack of beneficial outcome.
• 8:12
  So your PSA is 4. Now it went to eight, now it
• 8:14
  went to 12. Unnerving.
• 8:17
  I understand that that is compelling.
• 8:20
  Something needs to be considered.
• 8:24
  But don't do the thing that is guaranteed to cause you harm and
• 8:29
  has not been shown to help. There's a case reported at
• 8:33
  urological conference I went to. Doctor had a patient who was 86
• 8:37
  years old. His PSA went up to 90.
• 8:40
  He'd already had a prostatectomy.
• 8:42
  They offered him castration therapy, radiation therapy, said
• 8:45
  no, look, I'm good, I don't want any of the above.
• 8:50
  His PSA went up to 250. He still felt fine.
• 8:54
  No symptoms, no bone pain, his peeing OK, no treatment.
• 8:59
  He ultimately died of cancer, but it was lung cancer.
• 9:04
  In other words, PSA 280 didn't die from prostate cancer.
• 9:08
  Now, look, I'm not lobbying that you have that high number, but I
• 9:11
  am sharing with you that we need to pause in our panic.
• 9:16
  We need to really contemplate how do we want to live?
• 9:20
  What's the risk of doing a treatment?
• 9:22
  Is it psychological comfort to have things done that are
• 9:26
  harmful and not been shown to have value?
• 9:29
  And really, how long would a man live with APSA of 60 in the
• 9:33
  absence of a treatment? We now have accumulated clinical
• 9:36
  evidence, patients that we've treated, that I've treated.
• 9:40
  Gentleman with known prostate cancer, PSA at 50.
• 9:45
  It's been that way for five years.
• 9:48
  He's at 50. No castration, no radiation,
• 9:53
  right? Alternative treatments outlined
• 9:56
  in my book, there's a lot you can do for your health, a lot
• 9:59
  you can do for your global health.
• 10:02
  Life is about a lot more than just the status of your
• 10:05
  prostate. It's important.
• 10:06
  Look, I get that part, and I want you to be mindful of it,
• 10:10
  but I don't want you to chase false hope.
• 10:13
  The medical industrial complex is so petrified in this pathway
• 10:17
  to the tune of billions of dollars, it's going to take a
• 10:21
  lot to RIP them off of that meat wagon.
• 10:25
  It's going to take a lot and it's going to be up to us grass
• 10:29
  roots people. It's going to be up to people
• 10:32
  like me. We're doing the research.
• 10:34
  It's going to take years. Appreciate you listening.
• 10:37
  I appreciate your support for the endeavor.
• 10:40
  We are self funding the research.
• 10:41
  There's nothing behind it except for my inescapable curiosity and
• 10:48
  really, the need to be documenting outcomes.
• 10:51
  How do patients do? That's the only way we're ever
• 10:54
  going to know. So my hypothesis.
• 10:57
  Here comes the ridiculous radical part.
• 11:00
  Prostate cancer cells like to live in the prostate gland.
• 11:07
  When you destroy the gland, they lose their natural location for
• 11:12
  proliferation. They are forced, through lack of
• 11:16
  access to the prostate, to go elsewhere.
• 11:19
  So the hypothesis is that if you leave the prostate, you don't
• 11:23
  screw with it, you treat the body, you make the immune system
• 11:27
  fight the cancer, you prevent it from metastasizing, but you
• 11:30
  leave the gland alone, let the cancer stay there, won't hurt
• 11:36
  you. Where does that info come from?
• 11:39
  Well, the cadaveric studies, Most men over the age of 90 have
• 11:44
  prostate cancer cells buried in the gland.
• 11:48
  That's evidence that this is a normal chronologic phenomenon,
• 11:53
  and that muck in the gland may well be counterproductive.
• 11:58
  You irradiate the gland, you destroy it.
• 12:01
  Cancer cells have nowhere to go home, nowhere to call home.
• 12:05
  They are then looking for a new location.
• 12:08
  I understand that this is a hypothesis.
• 12:09
  It's hard to prove, but they all begin with intuitive
• 12:14
  observation, with logic, with honest interpretation of the
• 12:18
  information at hand. And I've shared that with you.
• 12:21
  Studies do not support what we're doing right now.
• 12:23
  It's working, folks. The anomalies build.
• 12:26
  So what's the level of PSA that I worry about?
• 12:29
  I worry about the dynamic of change.
• 12:32
  Somebody comes with APSA of 25. We don't never biopsy that.
• 12:38
  We never remove the gland. We never irradiate that.
• 12:42
  We use interval assessments to judge the trajectory.
• 12:48
  The PSA goes from 25 to 28 to 24 to 30 to 20.
• 12:53
  All the same, the variance from one PSA to the next can be 25 to
• 12:58
  50% without any change in the underlying disease.
• 13:02
  So slow interpretation. Take radiation off of your To Do
• 13:07
  List folks. And if your doc says, well, you
• 13:09
  know, your PSA went up, it's time to irradiate you.
• 13:13
  Yikes. Radiation increases your risk of
• 13:16
  secondary malignancy. Lymphoma, leukemia, think other
• 13:20
  cancers. Radiation is tissue damaging.
• 13:23
  It may well impose more harm to the heart.
• 13:26
  One of the leading causes of death from men with prostate
• 13:29
  cancer is heart disease, to say nothing of dementia.
• 13:33
  So why consider it? But here's the reason why.
• 13:38
  I mean, maybe I'm wrong, right? I have to be honest and say that
• 13:41
  my theories, my observations, although supported by the
• 13:45
  research and although we see good clinical outcomes on this
• 13:49
  pathway, remain to be proven, determined.
• 13:55
  The harm done by radiation, however, is irrefutable.
• 13:58
  But every man has to walk his own path.
• 14:00
  The only thing you have is the moment at hand.
• 14:05
  The only thing we have that we can control, that we can count
• 14:08
  on is our vitality, our strength, our virility, our
• 14:14
  brain, our heart, how we Live Today.
• 14:19
  Are we going to die in the future?
• 14:22
  Well, it's it's likely. Odds are that at some point
• 14:25
  we're going to die. It doesn't mean however, that we
• 14:29
  can defer that consequence by some radioactive therapy,
• 14:33
  radiotherapy that'll guarantee to corrode the moment at hand
• 14:38
  with no back end benefit. So my PSA cut off.
• 14:44
  The PSA cut offs are all made-up.
• 14:48
  They're arbitrary. Nobody really knows.
• 14:50
  The idea of four being cut off is absurd.
• 14:53
  It is not applicable to every man.
• 14:56
  In fact, not applicable to any. So when you get APSA number that
• 15:01
  all their doctors are panicking about, stop back up and think.
• 15:07
  Just say no to radiation. Just say no to prostate removal.
• 15:11
  Focus on the things you can do on your own to maintain your
• 15:16
  best health. I'm here to serve you, inform
• 15:19
  you, and I really honor my patience giving me good
• 15:22
  information. Thanks to all of you that
• 15:25
  challenge me and send articles for me to review and study.
• 15:29
  I do love it. Until next time gang.
• 15:31
  Remember never a room a moment to panic.
• 15:35
  The PSA cut off is really the dynamic of change, not a
• 15:39
  singular number in time and when to consider radiation.
• 15:45
  Never. All right, till next time.
• 15:47
  Thanks for watching. Bye.