Well one of the articles I read on the internet said that this medical clinic in Mexico had NO data to support their claims. Just them saying so...no studies. So as far as I'm concerned it might as well be green M&M's & soda. But as I've already said, I have two friends who had family members go the magic Mexico clinic route, and both of their family members died horrible, painful deaths, so maybe I've just got a bias against sugar-free, organic diets as a treatment for cancer. But I'm still interested in seeing the info on his cancer being incurable, because, again, that might change my opinion.

__________________

Aliadam...Isn't Bryce, the little boy that Jody in MN updates us on periodically, on a similar diet plan for his leukemia? Drats...It has been awhile since her last update, but I believe she posted something along the lines of an organic diet with low carb...I just don't remember enough of the details...Anyway, she said it was working to keep his blood free of the cancer cells when the normal treatments weren't helping.

My aunt fought a nasty battle with cancer of the lymph nodes. This was almost 16 years ago, so I don't know what exactly the cancer was called. She went the standard route with treatments, radiation, chemo, and surgery that removed tumors the size of cantaloupes. She died...miserable, weak, and sick all the time.

Maybe this boy just wants to spend what time he has left feeling normal instead of pumped up with chemicals. Might not be the choice I would make...but it's not my life and he's not my son.

Just food for thought.

Interesting point about the Mexican Clinic...if you have any links with more information about the treatment, I would love to read up on it.

Yes, Jodie in Minn nephew is doing something similar. *They currently have NO other treatment options left for him but are trying to get into an experimental program, and she has said they will do that if they can. *So they're just doing this currently as they had NOTHING else to do. *I have asked her about this (as gently as I can) because it does worry me that if he gets no further treatment he will die. *But my understanding from her was that they were still going to go traditional if they could find something. *Perhaps she can clarify better.

I will look for the article I was reading earlier and post it if I can find it (and figure out how to post...remember who you're talking to her ). * But I'm still waiting on the info about his condition being incurable. *All I've heard so far was the chemo was uncomfortable.


Edited to add this found on USA Today website:

Abraham and his family are treating his cancer with an herbal remedy four times a day and an organic diet under the guidance of a clinic in Mexico. The remedy, called the Hoxsey method, has not been clinically tested, and there is no scientific evidence that it is effective, the American Cancer Society says.



A lump on Abraham's neck discovered last year turned out to be Hodgkin's disease, which has a high survival rate with treatment — 85% of patients are alive five years later, according to the American Cancer Society.

__________________

Spoodler, here's another article from George Mason University. *I've edited it down somewhat because it's so long and I don't know how to do links, but I included those parts that I think question the treatment:

A Tale of One Teen and Two Cancer Treatments –
Just Don’t Say One of Them Doesn’t Work
July 26, 2006
Trevor Butterworth
Coverage of the Abraham Starchild Cherrix’s battle to forgo chemotherapy for alternative cancer therapy avoids talking about the fundamental issue: does the Hoxsey method work? And how would one go about making that judgment?

Here’s an ethical dilemma: How do you report a treatment for cancer that has no basis in science, no demonstrable causal effectiveness, isn’t available in the United States because it is banned by the Food and Drug Administration, and did nothing to cure the person who invented it?

Do you call the Hoxsey treatment quackery? Snake oil? A danger to public health? No, because journalists aren’t supposed to decide what is and isn’t proper medicine.

banned in the United States and considered quackery by the medical profession.






“Abraham began researching an alternative treatment that consists of herbal supplements and an organic diet free of processed sugar. The treatment was initiated by Harry Hoxsey, a former Texas cancer clinic operator who was accused by the Food and Drug Administration of peddling worthless medicine -- and who died of cancer.

But Abraham's father became a believer in the Hoxsey method when the family traveled in March to the clinic in Mexico. "I've talked to the people who survived, and not only did they survive, they didn't have any side effects," he said.

With his family's support, Abraham began the Hoxsey regimen several months ago. His father says Abraham's tumors continue to grow, but more slowly.”

This may be a sympathetic approach to take with a suffering teenager and his family. But it is a little too sympathetic. By describing Hoxsey as a “cancer clinic operator,” readers might just think that Hoxsey had medical training; he didn’t. It’s also misleading to say that Hoxsey was “accused” of “peddling worthless medicine” when the FDA actually forced him to close all of his treatment centers for peddling worthless medicine.


the American Cancer Society’s examination and dismissal of the evidence for the Hoxsey method.


But one cannot be impartial with respect to the evidence. For Cherrix to weigh the benefits of Hoxsey over chemotherapy may seem like a rational exercise; but it is fundamentally irrational if there is no attempt to apply a common standard of evaluation to both therapies.

Not to be cruel, but few, if any, 16-year olds can claim genuine expertise in oncology or epidemiology or the statistical methods needed to evaluate clinical research. Indeed, given the formidable training required to conduct such research, it is arguable that no 16-year old could possess such expertise (for similar reasons, we do not consider even those teenagers who possess remarkable intellectual talents as candidates for supreme court vacancies, chairs of constitutional history or even TV pundits).


“Only 2 human studies of the Hoxsey herbal treatment have been published. One was published in a pamphlet provided by the Tijuana clinic and simply contains a description of 9 patients who received the treatment. It concluded that the treatment is effective, even though most of the Hoxsey-treated patients received standard cancer treatment in addition to the Hoxsey treatment. The other study published in the Journal of Naturopathic Medicine involved 39 people with various types of cancer who took the Hoxsey herbal treatment. Ten patients died after an average of 15 months and 23 never completed the study. Only 6 patients were disease-free after 48 months.

The National Advisory Cancer Council studied many of Hoxsey’s patient records and learned that most of the patients had never had biopsies, so that there was no confirmation that they actually had cancer. The National Cancer Institute investigated 400 patients who were reported as cured by Hoxsey. Patients or their families were interviewed, and all records were carefully reviewed. These patients fell into 3 groups: those who had been treated, but didn’t actually have cancer; those who had received successful conventional cancer treatment before seeing Hoxsey; and those who had cancer and had died of it, or were still alive with evidence of cancer. Out of the 400 cases, not one case of a Hoxsey cure could be documented.”

__________________

Thank you for the article...very interesting. I didn't even know what the treatment was called so I would never have found anything on my own.

It definitely sheds light on the topic.

It sounds extremely shady and you are right, it is like green M&M's and soda. I still think our government has no business in this particular situation.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.