What people use when they have cancer and want to get well with alternative treatment
Cancer is one of the most successful applications of insulin potentiation therapy (IPT). This method was first used to treat cancer in 1945, by Dr. Perez Garcia 1, and has been used with very good results by all the IPT doctors since.
The treatment of cancer patients with IPT is, it appears, harmless at worst, and spectacular at best. If cancer is caught early enough (which can be rather advanced), and if there is a chemotherapy drug or combination that has been found effective, complete remission with IPT is a very common occurrence. And all this without surgery, radiation, or major side effects. IPT cancer patients often feel (and look) better from the first treatment on, and often appear lively and enthusiastic. Even if IPT does not achieve complete remission, it generally helps relieve symptoms and pain, and improves quality of life for the days that remain to the patient. And at worst, reminiscent of of the Hippocratic Oath, it does no harm.
Once when I was visiting Dr. Perez Garcia 3 in his office, he showed me a follow-up CAT scan of one of his cancer patients, now in complete remission. Although there was absolutely no trace of tumors on the images, the radiologist, knowing the patient’s history, had apparently felt obliged to write that the tumors were now “almost invisible”. Donato laughed, “Yes, I am the doctor who can make your tumors ‘almost invisible’ … for the rest of your life!”
Wouldn’t every oncologist in the world like to have a tool that would allow him to joke with such joy?
Instead, oncology today offers a great deal of hope, but only after guiding the patient through a grim battlefield of mutilation (surgery), burning (radiation), and/or poisoning (“normal” or high dose chemotherapy). Grim side effects are accepted as common, likely, often inevitable, and are dealt with as well as possible: surgical scars and adhesions, hair loss, weight loss, nausea, sterility, immune system depression, and secondary infections. Survival for five years is considered a “cure”, no matter how much damage has been done to the patient’s general health. And the sad reality is that a large fraction of patients who die of cancer “complications” actually die from the side effects of treatment. (My own father certainly did.)
No wonder a new diagnosis of cancer is usually such a big shock to a patient. Cancer diagnosis often triggers strong negative reactions in many people: shame, horror, fatalism. IPT could provide new hope. If cancer is detected early, the IPT protocol appears to offer a good chance for complete remission without major negative side effects.
It seems almost too easy. My guess is that, even after IPT becomes proven, there will still be people who choose the former standard methods, under the misimpression that more suffering will bring better results. But the majority of patients will be overjoyed to go with a gentler, safer therapy.
While no statistics have been reported for IPT success rates for various cancer types, here is a rough estimate given by Dr. Perez Garcia 3 in an email, based on his years of experience. To summarize:
For tumor less than 4 cm, and no other therapies (chemo, radiation) have been used:
full remission rate 95%.
For tumor greater than 4 cm, and no other therapies used:
full remission rate 80%.
For recurrence/metastasis after other therapies were used:
full remission rate 25%, partial remission rate 70%, quality of life improvement 98%.
For terminally ill patients, with no liver impairment:
quality of life improvement 40%.
For brain tumor smaller than 2 cm, with no other therapies used:
tumor shrinkage response rate is 65%.
Again, these are rough estimates by just one doctor, based on his experience, and should not be used as if they were accurate.
Drs. Perez Garcia 1 and 2, in their work with the Oncodiagnosticator, a simple electrochemical blood analysis method, thought that they were able to detect cancer in its earliest stages, and even pre-cancerous conditions. Whether or not their observations are corroborated, it opens the imagination to a whole new system in which minimally invasive testing can detect pre-cancer or earliest stage cancer, and a few gentle IPT treatments can restore health, as verified again by more testing. A small preliminary study by SGA MD, at McGill University in 1975, found no predictive value. But the method has not, to my knowledge, been tested in any other laboratory.
In the mean time, there is nothing to stop any doctor from treating his cancer patients with the IPT protocol right now. It calls for exactly the same government-approved chemotherapy drugs, only in doses about 10 percent of normal. And it uses a commonly available hormone, insulin, as a biological response modifier. I am convinced that the only reason more doctors aren’t using it now is that they don’t know about it yet.
SGA MD has suggested that, in cases of cancer types that have a history of success with IPT, physicians should consider an IPT “safe-trial” period of about a month. IPT would be tried first. If rapid progress is observed, IPT would continue. If IPT is not working, the patient could then go on to a program of today’s standard treatments.
How can IPT achieve such superb reported results, yet with small fractional doses of IPT? We have our theories. You can read a summary on the How IPT Works page. And for more detailed discussion, see the patents, articles, and protocols by Dr. SGA and the Drs. Perez Garcia.
There appear to be several predominant mechanisms at work.
1. Insulin makes cell membranes more permeable,
so drugs can be transported and delivered more effectively.
2. There are many more insulin receptors on typical cancer cells,
so more drug concentration is delivered to them.
3. Insulin stimulates cancer cells to begin to divide, making them
more vulnerable to many chemotherapy drugs.
4. Possible stimulation of immune function and elimination of toxins.
5. Poorly-understood improvements of blood chemistry that favor healing
and discourage cancer.
IPT for cancer can be seen simply as chemotherapy, but a more refined style of chemotherapy. Dr. Paquette liked to use a Latin motto to describe IPT: Non nova sed nove — “nothing new, but in a new way”.
The same injection and IV supplies are used. And the same drugs are used; but the biological response of the body is modified to make them much more effective in much smaller, much less toxic doses. Effectiveness is reported to be so great that IPT can be used as a primary treatment, without the need for surgery and radiation.
This whole idea of IPT may seem so radical to some doctors that they may have a hard time taking the leap of faith needed to try it, even for a brief “safe-trial” period. But, based on the experience of other doctors, once they do, they will be very happy with the results. IPT, when verified, could truly be the fulfillment of chemotherapy.
So many cancer patients undergoing standard treatment look weak and malnourished, despite efforts to take supplements and eat a good diet. This can be partly due to the nausea and lack of appetite resulting from standard treatment (anorexia), and partly due to metabolic effects of the cancer itself (cachexia). Weight loss can be severe, and is responsible for much of the morbidity and mortality among cancer patients.
IPT avoids the nausea, and in fact stimulates a hearty appetite in patients. It also facilitates the rapid absorption into the body of intravenous nutrients given during the IPT treatment, and of food after the IPT treatment. See Kabadi UM et al, AIDS Patient Care STDS 2000 Nov;14(11):575-9, “Weight gain, improvement in metabolic profile, and CD4 count with insulin administration in an AIDS patient,” for a report of weight gain with daily subcutaneous insulin administration, which supports the idea that IPT could help patients gain weight, while simultaneously fighting tumors or infection.
As part of IPT cancer treatment, according to the 1992 patent, Dr. Perez Garcia 3 include substances like ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and magnesium bromide to stimulate the immune system and normalize the electrolytic balance of the body, typically deficient in magnesium in cases of cancer. These work together with the detoxification of the body, and the potentiation of anticancer drugs in the protocol.
Other vitamins and electrolytes are also administered, depending on the doctor’s judgment. Rapidly balancing the biochemistry in this way not only improves the health of the patient, but also apparently helps the body fight the tumors.
After an IPT treatment, patients are usually ravenously hungry. This is a great chance for them to eat heartily and gain the weight they need.
Viral or bacterial origin?
There is growing evidence that many or most cancers may have a hidden viral or even bacterial infection as the underlying cause. IPT has been shown to be extremely effective in treating and clearing both viral and bacterial infections, including those which are hidden in tissues and compartments of the body where normal drug treatment cannot effectively reach. Therefore it may be found to be advantageous to include antibiotic and antiviral drugs in many cancer IPT treatments, whether or not the underlying infectious agent is known. I call this multi-pathogen IPT (MP-IPT). (3/5/00)
Research is needed.
It is certainly the position of IPTQ.org that IPT cancer research should be undertaken. Lots of it. We need to understand the mechanisms. We need to fine tune the IPT treatment system, and document it better. We need to see if the claims of the IPT doctors stand up in a larger clinical setting. And eventually, I suppose, IPT will make it to the Olympics of cancer research: multi-center multi-protocol clinical trials. Mark my prediction: If the IPT protocol in such a program is approved and overseen by a team of experienced IPT doctors, the experiment will be terminated for compassionate reasons after a few months when the better results of gentler IPT treatments become quite obvious.
In the mean time, patients who want this treatment now, can either go to doctors who are already trained and experienced in IPT, or can talk their own doctors into taking the training and giving this protocol a try.
Let’s get serious
We are talking about cancer here. One of the leading causes of death worldwide. It is expected to surpass heart disease as the leading cause of death in the United States, within this decade. And in the US, 20 million new cancer cases per year are expected by 2020. In China alone, 500,000 people die of lung cancer every year.
And we’re not just talking about cancer and people. We’re also talking about money. Michael Milken, in a recent talk in San Francisco, cited economists who calculated that the value of eliminating cancer would be $46 trillion. IPT will not eliminate cancer, but it appears to promise a gentler and more effective treatment for many types of cancer, with a higher rate of complete remissions. As such I can estimate that IPT for cancer is worth at least $5 trillion. So it seems to me that five million dollars invested in IPT research could yield results worth at least a thousand times more. (See my paper about this.) Low risk and high rewards. Who will take up this challenge?
In the developing world, people get cancer, too. But they do not have the luxury of abundant medical care, nor could they afford it. Expensive drugs, high-tech radiation, surgical suites, are all out of reach. I recently read that millions of poor people with cancer in the developing regions die in quiet agony, for lack of treatment, and for lack of pain medications. IPT could offer them a simple, inexpensive, low-tech therapy that uses a much smaller, and therefore more affordable, dose of chemotherapy drugs.
Did you like this? If so, please bookmark it, RSS feed.