Latest / Intellectual Medicine / Biden's Prostate Cancer: The TRUTH Doctors Don't Want You To Know!

Transcript

Biden's Prostate Cancer: The TRUTH Doctors Don't Want You To Know! · Intellectual Medicine

0:00
So the news is that former President Joe Biden has prostate
0:04
cancer. But the good news, we're
0:06
reassured, is that it is hormonally sensitive and that
0:11
they can treat it and that they've been such advances in
0:15
prostate cancer therapy that he can live for years.
0:19
Holy cow, what a bundle of misinformation.
0:23
Now, I'm a hope is that the president has a good run, right?
0:26
Nobody wants to see anyone suffer.
0:28
Well, let's break this down a little bit.
0:31
How in the world can they feel so optimistic about what they're
0:34
about to do to him? Hormonally sensitive.
0:40
In conventional medical world, that means that they're going to
0:44
castrate them. That means that they do androgen
0:47
deprivation therapy. Why?
0:51
The belief is that testosterone feeds cancer, that it helps
0:57
cancer to initiate, and that it's like pouring gas on a fire.
1:02
So if you take away the testosterone, the cancer will
1:05
shrink and everything is good. Not so fast, everybody.
1:09
We got to think long and hard about this.
1:12
You got a man in his 80s. Well, any man for that matter.
1:15
But in particular, let's focus on the case at hand.
1:19
They found a nodule all right, then they biopsy him.
1:23
That's the first mistake. A biopsy is unnecessary folks,
1:28
to analyze the status of the prostate gland.
1:31
There are now biometrics, lab testing that can give us really
1:35
good information. And then there's an MRI of the
1:38
prostate, non invasive. Finally, the PSMA test, prostate
1:43
specific membrane antigen PET scan which can supersede the
1:48
need for a biopsy. The Gleason score at that point
1:53
is irrelevant. They said well, you know, the
1:56
biopsy showed you had a Gleason score of a nine, which is an
2:00
aggressive form. You don't need that information.
2:03
When is evidence that it's already in the bone?
2:06
That's declaration of its status.
2:09
So what do they do? They castrate.
2:12
Let's think about what that does.
2:13
What happens when you castrate a man with prostate cancer?
2:18
There are several things that are almost inevitable.
2:22
First amongst them, increase in heart disease risk.
2:26
There's an increased risk of heart attack, an increased risk,
2:30
almost inevitable consequence of muscle atrophy, bone thinning,
2:37
tripping and falling. You lose power, you lose
2:40
balance. Why?
2:41
Not only are the muscles weakened, the brain gets weak.
2:46
Cognitive function declines. Dementia risk increases.
2:51
The mood can be depressed. Testosterone is essential for
2:55
proper brain functioning. You eliminate it at your own
3:00
peril. It weakens the immune system.
3:03
Risk of infection goes up. Risk of seizures goes up.
3:07
See see where this is going. You have an octogenarian man
3:13
with a weak brain to begin with and a tendency to fall.
3:19
Then you're going to whack his testosterone, you're going to
3:21
castrate him, and all these bad things are going to happen.
3:26
How in the world can we feel good about that?
3:29
What? How did medicine get stuck in
3:33
this space? Well, I think we should talk
3:36
about that, right? Because the dogma is powerful.
3:41
Testosterone feeds cancer. Block testosterone.
3:45
Cancer gets better. What I really care about, what
3:49
you should care about, is not only the state of the cancer,
3:52
we'd all prefer it not to be there, but the global vitality.
3:56
What is our health like? Joe Biden is very unlikely to
4:01
die from prostate cancer. If he trips and falls and breaks
4:05
his hip, his likelihood that he'll die afterwards is pretty
4:09
high. At that point, his oncologist
4:11
and his urologist declare victory.
4:13
Hey, our treatment worked. He didn't die of cancer.
4:16
He gets a heart attack. Once again, didn't die of
4:19
cancer, treatment worked. See where I'm going with this?
4:22
The way he had conventional medicine cures prostate cancer
4:26
is to have you die first from something else.
4:29
Like that's a great achievement. Worse than death would be a
4:33
progressive accelerated mental decline.
4:37
What a horrible path. What a bad thing to do to a
4:41
person. And yet, how much have we been
4:45
led to believe is the only path? It isn't.
4:50
There are other approaches that could be considered, but let's
4:52
reflect on how we got here. How do we get to this point?
4:58
In the 1940s and 50s, Doctor Huggins, very esteemed
5:01
physician, a Nobel laureate, noted that when dogs who had
5:07
prostate cancer implanted on them were castrated, the
5:12
prostate cancer went away. Interesting.
5:16
So he extrapolated that into some human cases, taking the
5:19
observation that in some of these cases there was a
5:24
reduction in the prostate cancer tumors that became the dogma
5:30
that became accepted fund of knowledge.
5:34
And it's been that way really since the 1950s.
5:38
And what has occurred over the decades is that an entire
5:42
multibillion dollar treatment intervention industry has been
5:48
built on that foundation. When that happens, folks, it's
5:52
really hard to talk that dog off the meat wagon.
5:56
This dogma is tough to change. Think about it.
6:00
Who's going to be motivated to consider it an alternative when
6:04
pharmaceutical companies are making a killing, producing ever
6:08
more powerful castration drugs, when doctors and hospitals are
6:14
harvesting prostate glands or radiating them, are going on
6:18
this treadmill of therapy? You would expect that with all
6:23
of this advance in treatment may be a profound benefit to
6:27
mankind, to the outcomes. We'll talk about how Doctor
6:31
Huggins theories and evidence has been recently challenged.
6:36
But let's look at the evidence of benefit, or I should say the
6:39
lack thereof. Since 2012, the death rate per
6:42
capita from prostate cancer flat as a pancake.
6:47
It ain't going down. How about when I read in the
6:50
newspaper article and they were saying that the doctor, well,
6:53
you know, they've been great advances in prostate cancer
6:56
therapy. Folks, the advances are more
6:59
illusion than reality. You have to look past the
7:04
summary of the article. In 1975, the five year survival
7:11
rate for metastatic prostate cancer to the bone was 30
7:15
percent. 1975, it's a great year.
7:19
It's in high school. What fun.
7:21
Anyhow, back to the topic at hand, 30% Now we've had great
7:26
advances. And in 2020, the five year
7:30
survival rate for metastatic prostate cancer was 37%.
7:36
Look, I get it, it's a nudge in the right direction, but at what
7:39
price? And it certainly is not a
7:41
breakthrough. This is not what I expect when
7:45
things work. When things work, the death rate
7:49
per capita should decline. When things work, the five year
7:53
survival rate should elevate significantly, not
7:56
incrementally. And were the sort of lack of
8:01
compelling benefit the only issue at hand, I could live with
8:05
that. The problem is the treatments
8:07
that are being promoted cause harm.
8:11
I already shared with you the problems with androgen
8:13
deprivation therapy. The brain, the muscle, the body,
8:16
the bone. There is a mutual bias when men
8:22
are faced with a scenario, right?
8:25
Oh my goodness, I have prostate cancer.
8:28
Oh, how horrible. It's in the bone.
8:30
That's not such a good thing. What am I going to do about it?
8:33
Well, we're going to put you on this drug.
8:35
You're going to grow breasts, you're going to get fat, tired,
8:38
weak. You're going to lose your
8:39
erection, your sex drive, your confidence, your motivation.
8:43
Your brain's going to get foggy, your risk of dementia's going to
8:45
go up, and your risk of heart attack will go up.
8:47
But you know, it's what we got and it'll keep you alive.
8:54
I'm not so sure. Look at the evidence again.
8:59
Enzalutamide is 1 of the androgen deprivation of sort of
9:04
testosterone blocking therapies. And I highlight that particular
9:07
drug because of a study that was published that showed in the
9:12
summary when you block testosterone with this drug,
9:16
there was a significant increase in survival.
9:21
Now when you read about significance or when a doctor
9:25
talks about it or when they summarize an article or a study
9:28
about it, significance is a mathematical equation,
9:33
statistically significant. Is it clinically relevant and is
9:39
it worth the price of admission? Well, this particular study, the
9:43
median survival on the drug was 32.4 months compared to the
9:49
placebo, which was 30.2 months, a differential of about two
9:55
months. Now look, if I get two more
9:58
months of life, yeah, sign me up.
10:00
I kind of like being alive. I understand the end comes.
10:04
And were that the only metric, right, we could be on board.
10:09
The problem is conventional medicine and a lot of these
10:13
studies, it's very easy to measure life and death.
10:15
Are they alive or not? If they're alive, that's good,
10:20
but at what price? Are men undergoing this kind of
10:24
treatment fully alive? Or are they just existing,
10:29
waiting to die? But before they die, they
10:32
wither? There must be a better way.
10:35
How are we going to find that out?
10:37
How do we get there from where we are?
10:39
We've got this incredible fortress in front of us of big
10:43
pharma, conventional medicine, hospitals, everybody, everybody
10:49
is thriving with the status quo. To arrive at something fully
10:54
different, it requires it's going to require a grass roots
10:57
effort because there's never going to be a pharmaceutical
11:01
company that will put forth extensive research on non
11:06
patentable drugs, on non patentable treatments, even if
11:11
they will hold merit, simply not in their financial best
11:14
interest. Nor will they put out big
11:17
studies analyzing adverse effects of their treatment not
11:20
in their best interest. When I read these studies, there
11:24
tends to be silence regarding quality of life issues.
11:28
They're harder to measure and they get therefore diminished in
11:33
their relevance. So as an individual gentleman,
11:38
you need to make these decisions, you need to be
11:40
assertive and you need the information to do it.
11:42
The options aren't merely accept the therapy that's offered or
11:48
wither and die. You know, there are other
11:50
approaches that can be considered.
11:52
We talk about them with repurposed drugs that may have
11:56
value, but how about this for a a change in perception?
12:01
It turns out this concept of testosterone stimulating
12:05
prostate cancer simply may not be true.
12:09
It was Doctor Abraham Morganteller in his fantastic
12:12
book Testosterone for Life. He did some of the research
12:15
looking back to Doctor Huggins original conclusions, and when
12:19
he did a deep study regarding the origins of that connection,
12:25
he found it boiled down to 1 case study that became the basis
12:32
for the presumption that testosterone feeds cancer.
12:36
One case study and it became so dogmatic and has remained so
12:41
dogmatic that to actually challenge it with real research
12:46
would almost be tantamount to an unethical study.
12:50
We're going to take men and what?
12:52
Give them testosterone or we're going to take men and we're not
12:56
going to castrate them, right? Yeah, why not?
13:00
Why not think differently? We know the castration therapy,
13:03
at least now, you know, benefits.
13:05
Yeah, not so much. Harm almost guaranteed.
13:09
Well, it turns out that there are some innovative researchers
13:13
that have studied this at Johns Hopkins.
13:16
They are exploring and have explored something called
13:19
bipolar androgen therapy. And what it boils down to is
13:24
putting men with prostate cancer on high doses of testosterone
13:31
and then crashing it down low with androgen blocking and doing
13:35
this in cycles. It was motivated by men who have
13:41
had their prostate removed. They went on hormone blocking
13:45
therapy. And what happens every time?
13:50
Eventually the PSA starts to climb and the cancer comes back.
13:55
That is almost inevitable. If you don't die from something
13:58
else first, this is your fate. And as it starts to climb, it's
14:03
referred to as castration resistant therapy and what
14:08
conventional medicine does. They really don't know what to
14:11
do then it's really hard. The drugs are awful.
14:14
We can talk more about those. They have ghastly side effects,
14:18
marginal to no benefit. They double down right, block it
14:21
even harder. Well, at Hopkins, they noted the
14:26
theory that may be possible, that by shifting these levels of
14:31
testosterone, the prostate cancer cells may not like that.
14:36
And it turns out one of the reasons why it has not held up
14:40
that testosterone equals prostate cancer risk is because
14:45
there are two different levels to consider.
14:47
There's your blood level of testosterone that can be
14:50
measured. That is not the same folks as
14:53
the level in the prostate gland. The prostate gland saturates
14:58
with testosterone after which it can't absorb anymore.
15:02
The glass is full. You can double up your blood
15:05
level. It's not going to affect the
15:06
gland. Now we know from studies the
15:09
consensus amongst andrologist men and women who specialize in
15:14
hormone therapy. Consensus is a testosterone does
15:18
not increase prostate cancer risk.
15:21
A testosterone does not increase cardiovascular risk, nor does it
15:27
increase prostatic hypertrophy, enlarging of the gland.
15:30
All right, that's all well and good, but how about if you
15:33
already have prostate cancer? This bipolar therapy when
15:38
applied to men who had castration resistant prostate
15:42
cancer, turns out many of them had a positive effect.
15:47
That is, the testosterone of the PSA levels declined and they
15:52
gained the benefit of testosterone.
15:54
Hooray, a restoration of vitality.
15:57
That's a good thing. Now taking that research, that
16:02
theory and applying it to men who have not had to suffer the
16:07
consequence of castration but are having a progression of
16:11
their disease is a leap of clinical judgement that has not
16:16
been proven to work, that might in fact fail, that might in fact
16:20
actually accelerate cancer. That's a possibility, but
16:24
there's evidence that it may actually be beneficial.
16:28
And the only way we're going to figure that out is by a
16:31
combination of forward thinking clinicians.
16:35
You know, I count myself as one and open minded patients willing
16:40
to step out of the pathway of conventional care to consider
16:44
another approach. Here's what they're going to get
16:47
for their reward. Preserve vitality that's almost
16:51
guaranteed. They're not going to have
16:53
castration. They're not going to suffer that
16:55
host of horrible effects. All right, that's all good.
17:00
But will the prostate cancer itself be suppressed?
17:04
Will their survival be better than or as good as the men that
17:10
are getting castrated? I believe there's reason to
17:13
believe that it will be, but I couldn't tell you that that's
17:17
been proven or demonstrated. I can share with you there are
17:20
men on this pathway right now, and I'm grateful for them and
17:24
you should be too because we're tracking these outcomes.
17:27
We do research at intellectual medicine.
17:29
We keep tabs on things. We like to know how they're
17:32
working. We'll continue to report that to
17:34
you guys. But my point today is to
17:37
emphasize the avoidance of harm, right?
17:41
Isn't that rule number one? First, do no harm.
17:44
So when, if ever, should you consider castration?
17:48
If you have prostate cancer, you, in my view, never, never,
17:54
ever do you do it unless you are desperately sick.
17:57
If your PSA is going up and the doctor says, well, that is a
18:02
chemical relapse. What nonsense.
18:05
We're treating a lab study. We're giving you this
18:08
devastating therapy guaranteed to cause harm, not because
18:13
you're manifesting any symptom, but because the lab is going up
18:17
a little bit. We know there's no correlation.
18:19
I should say there's very weak correlation between APSA and the
18:24
status of the prostate cancer in the body.
18:28
It can be contained within that capsule with APSA level that is
18:33
going up and up and up. It can still be contained.
18:37
Patient of mine with APSA went from 100 up to 300 roughly.
18:42
Scary. I mean 100 is scary but imagine
18:45
jumping a 300 bone scan. PSMA studies, no metastatic
18:51
process, all contained within the prostate gland.
18:55
No androgen deprivation therapy for my guy.
18:58
He feels great. So do not let them do this to
19:02
you for a number of reasons #1 is going to harm you #2 no
19:05
evidence that's going to extend your life.
19:07
And #3 we know resistance to castration or androgen
19:12
deprivation therapy will occur there.
19:16
When it occurs that ADT treatment is no longer valuable,
19:21
no longer has an effect, you may in fact need that later.
19:26
When might you need it? When and if only if the prostate
19:32
cancer hits the bones. That's where it usually goes
19:35
when it metastasizes. It hits the bones and it's
19:38
causing excruciating pain. When you're at that level, then
19:42
the therapy is warranted and it can't alleviate the pain.
19:46
But bear in mind it's nearing the end of the game.
19:49
You may still have a couple years in you, but by all means
19:52
when the pain is excruciating then it's worth the price of a
19:57
side effect to get out of the pain.
19:59
I get that right and that's why you hold off on it.
20:03
Wait until you desperately need it for several reasons. 1 you
20:09
may never need it. The cancer may stay within the
20:12
within the capsule of a gland. The span of your life and APSA
20:17
level doesn't tell you whether or not that's the case.
20:20
No imaging study can declare it, except for maybe the PSMA.
20:26
So you want to hold this in reserve in the event you need it
20:29
in the hope that you never will wait until you see the whites of
20:33
their eyes, right? Then you can fire it and then
20:36
you'll have preserved its therapeutic value, its impact.
20:41
So I know it sounds unnerving to contemplate APSA going up, and
20:47
it is a bit unnerving to think that the only time we would
20:53
intervene with androgen deprivation therapy is when
20:57
symptoms compel us to. The prostate cancer can go to
21:00
other organs. Liver, no kidney, it can go
21:04
other places, but mostly bone. Bear in mind, as you have these
21:09
reflections, you or friends or others, that the vast majority
21:14
of men with prostate cancer do not die from the prostate cancer
21:17
itself. Yes, it happens, and yes, it's
21:21
sad when it does, but the objective is to not pursue
21:26
treatments of little value that can cause harm when there are
21:31
other options that you can consider and that the goal
21:36
maintaining vitality may hold on to your brain, hold on your
21:40
muscle. As sad as the President Biden's
21:43
diagnosis is, and as hopeful as we all are that will have a good
21:49
outcome, I shudder to think the consequence of giving this poor
21:53
man castration treatment. Are these the same people that
21:57
were advising him about his mental state years ago?
22:00
Because I don't see a good outcome with a man with
22:04
predisposed towards falling cognitive impairment and
22:09
accelerating of those conditions.
22:12
So every man has to make his own choice and it's not wrong.
22:16
It's not wrong to pick androgen deprivation therapy.
22:20
My objection is the exclusivity of this being offered as a
22:24
pathway forward and the failure of medicine to seriously
22:29
contemplate alternatives in the face of this type of hideous
22:34
adverse profile with marginal merit.
22:38
Well, together, you and I and people like us, we can craft
22:43
that new pathway. It's not going to happen from
22:46
the top down. Nobody from the pharmaceutical
22:49
world or the hospital world is likely to embrace the concepts
22:54
that I'm sharing with you. But you know it's out there, and
22:58
I encourage you to do your homework and be cautious.
23:02
Do not fly out of the country going to some tertiary care
23:07
center that promises to cure cancer.
23:09
You'll end up broke and the cancer will still be there.
23:12
I've seen it far too many times, right?
23:15
This is chronic suppression we're talking about.
23:18
All right, folks. So the president, President
23:20
Biden has prostate cancer. You know, it's almost
23:23
inevitable. We talked about this.
23:26
By the time a man hits 90, there's a 60 to 80% chance a lot
23:30
of prostate cancer cells in the gland.
23:34
If something is that prevalent, we can consider it a normal
23:37
progression. Most of these, the vast majority
23:40
of them, are going to be atypical dormant cells sleeping
23:45
in the gland. Let them sleep.
23:47
Never biopsy. Do biometrics and MRI if you
23:51
must. Avoid castration at all cost.
23:55
Don't let them cut out your prostate gland and do not
23:58
irradiate it. These are the tenants of the the
24:02
protocol I've developed based upon my research, the
24:05
observation of adverse effect. We'll continue this mission
24:10
together well indefinitely until it rises to a level where men
24:16
have equal access to this information.
24:19
And yet they have they can pick a different pathway.
24:23
If I had President Biden in my office, I would direct him in
24:27
another path and I believe it'd be to his benefit.
24:30
But I've got you and we can continue our conversation.
24:34
So thanks for your time and tuning in.
24:36
I'll talk to you soon.