Previous Article ] Menu ] Next Article ]

 

Are We Certain that Vitamin Therapy is Not Pro-Neoplastic?
by
Jonathan Collin M.D.
Editor-in-Chief

    In an editorial last month (Issue #154 May 1996), I expressed a fairly controversial viewpoint that beta carotene might be contributing to pro-neoplasia formation, meaning favoring malignant cell growth, in the high-risk smoking population. I fully expect that a letter will appear soon shooting down that hypothesis. Nevertheless, it raises the issue that appears to underlie the unconventional medical communities championing of vitamins and stoning of drugs. The pithy reason given for bad-mouthing medical physicians prescription(s) is that drugs are dangerous, ultimately toxic and potentially carcinogenic, whereas mega-vitamin supplementation is safe, nontoxic and noncarcinogenic. Broadly speaking, vitamin supplementation has rarely created significant poisoning or toxicity, except in the fiasco several years ago when an unscrupulous Japanese manufacturer of amino acids unloaded a tainted batch of tryptophan on the American wholesale market. However, long-term megavitamin therapy has never undergone methodical outcome research for morbidity, and the question of it playing a pro-neoplastic role remains essentially unknown. When a long-time follower of natural healing ultimately dies of cancer, heart disease, or infection, did the use of supplementation stave off the disease that would have presented even earlier in the individuals life, or did it possibly contribute to the disease formation? It seems that mega-vitamin use in quenching free radical pathology, would argue that vitamins prevent degenerative disease formation, but this theory remains a belief system rather than a documented observation.

    Mostly what we do in alternative medical therapy is experimental. We assume that long-term use of mega-vitamin supplementation will benefit the patient, because short-term use obviously improves his or her symptoms. The sticky question remains did we really prevent the major disease from happening? One cannot set the clock back and take the patient who has succumbed to a malignancy and check out a different course of action, using no megavitamin therapy, or no alternative treatment. Preventing disease in an individual is not a measurable event.

    Given the fact that we cannot measure prevention, might it not be prudent to reassess yearly, what we are doing with our patients megavitamin supplementation? Are there any signs that we might be off course, actually encouraging new degeneration occurrence? If so, should we shift gears and radically change the patients supplementation protocol? It would appear that the only rational approach to this difficulty would be to give the protocol a testing. Eliminating supplement use for a time period allows some observation as to supplement need, dependency, and adverse effect versus benefit. Changing supplements offers a glimpse at how one group of nutrients may be affecting our system quite differently from a second grouping. The soft sciences of electrical field diagnosis by devices capable of measuring subtle energies appears to diagnose supplement compatibility. Such techniques, including muscle testing of supplements, may be quite irrational scientifically, but may offer clues that some supplement(s) just aren't right for us and may need avoidance or elimination.

    As difficult as these questions may be, we must consider that a supplement is not being used just today, last week, last month, next week, or next month. For many of our patients, the supplement has been used the last several years, even the last several decades. When a patient follows our advice and then falls away from our practice, the vitamin prescription is still acting on their system. If they develop cancer or cardiovascular disease, we cannot just ignore it as an anomaly. Just like the accountant's statement of assets and debits, we have those who really did benefit preventive-wise and others who did not. Aware of that uncertainty, we should always question if our supplement prescriptions are really on track or might be contributing to pro-neoplasia.

Jonathan Collin, M.D.

Menu
"Blinded" is Right
Clinical Medicine for the Year 2000: Treating Nuclear Bomb Exposure
Fleecing of America by Pharmaceuticals
Joy Out of Soy
Letter from the Publisher
Oncologists' Guaranteed Emplyment Act of 1998
Sleazy Side of Alternative Medicine
Stop Breast Cancer in Its Tracks
Vitamin B12: injectable versus oral
Vitamin Therapy
Dr Glenn Warner


http://www.tldp.com
info@townsendletter.com
360-385-6021
360-385-0699 (fax)


© 1983-2002 Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients
All Rights Reserved.

ADVERTISERS CLICK HERE FOR INFO