Firsthand Experience with Fenbendazole, Ivermectin, Lactoferrin?

@cxracer "... the medical community provided me with zero possible cancer combating protocols, medications, vitamins, or supplements, etc."

Maybe there's a reason for that.

Years ago, I had a hyperactive thyroid, so my endocrinologist killed it with radioactive iodine. A month later, a couple long -time friends told me that I was slightly slurring my words. I normally speak quickly when excited & thought they were imagining it. Then my parents noticed it.

My next endocrinologist visit confirmed that my thyroid level had dropped to zero & prescribed a thyroid supplement.

My point is, patients are the worst observers of their own medical conditions. It's not only the patients, but professional caregivers like nurses, doctors, etc. are not the best observers either. In normal "blind" studies, a patient doesn't know whether he/she is getting a trial treatment or a placebo. However, if his/her professional caregivers DO know, there is still a bias in evaluating the patient's condition.

This is why "double-blind" studies are the gold standard. Maybe the medical community understands that.

I'm reminded of the case of Steve McQueen:

From Google: "McQueen underwent a controversial program developed by William Donald Kelley, a former orthodontist who had his license revoked in 1976."

https://www.mesothelioma.com/blog/steve-mcqueen-and-mesothelioma-an-actor-and-veterans-last-battle/ -- Quotes:

"Many scientists regarded Dr. Kelly’s methods as quackery. Dr. Kelly’s spin on Gerson Therapy was based on the belief that all cancers stem from a lack of a pancreatic enzyme. This method of treatment centered around unorthodox methods, including: ...

"The treatment also included a daily dose of laetrile, a cancer drug created from the pits of apricots. The drug was never approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA). The National Cancer Institute (NCI) described its use as ineffective and dangerous. In later studies, it was shown this type of therapy actually worsened the patient’s quality of life. As McQueen sought out this controversial treatment in Mexico, ...

"McQueen’s supposed recovery was short-lived. Although his American doctors previously warned McQueen that his heart wasn’t strong enough for surgery, his new doctors operated anyway. The surgery itself went smoothly. The doctors removed some tumors from his neck. But, McQueen died from cardiac arrest the next day. He was 50 years old."

To quote a very old saying, "The patient died, but the operation was a success."

@cxracer "... the medical community provided me with zero possible cancer combating protocols, medications, vitamins, or supplements, etc."

Maybe there's a reason for that.

Years ago, I had a hyperactive thyroid, so my endocrinologist killed it with radioactive iodine. A month later, a couple long -time friends told me that I was slightly slurring my words. I normally speak quickly when excited & thought they were imagining it. Then my parents noticed it.

My next endocrinologist visit confirmed that my thyroid level had dropped to zero & prescribed a thyroid supplement.

My point is, patients are the worst observers of their own medical conditions. It's not only the patients, but professional caregivers like nurses, doctors, etc. are not the best observers either. In normal "blind" studies, a patient doesn't know whether he/she is getting a trial treatment or a placebo. However, if his/her professional caregivers DO know, there is still a bias in evaluating the patient's condition.

This is why "double-blind" studies are the gold standard. Maybe the medical community understands that.

I'm reminded of the case of Steve McQueen:

From Google: "McQueen underwent a controversial program developed by William Donald Kelley, a former orthodontist who had his license revoked in 1976."

https://www.mesothelioma.com/blog/steve-mcqueen-and-mesothelioma-an-actor-and-veterans-last-battle/ -- Quotes:

"Many scientists regarded Dr. Kelly’s methods as quackery. Dr. Kelly’s spin on Gerson Therapy was based on the belief that all cancers stem from a lack of a pancreatic enzyme. This method of treatment centered around unorthodox methods, including: ...

"The treatment also included a daily dose of laetrile, a cancer drug created from the pits of apricots. The drug was never approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA). The National Cancer Institute (NCI) described its use as ineffective and dangerous. In later studies, it was shown this type of therapy actually worsened the patient’s quality of life. As McQueen sought out this controversial treatment in Mexico, ...

"McQueen’s supposed recovery was short-lived. Although his American doctors previously warned McQueen that his heart wasn’t strong enough for surgery, his new doctors operated anyway. The surgery itself went smoothly. The doctors removed some tumors from his neck. But, McQueen died from cardiac arrest the next day. He was 50 years old."

To quote a very old saying, "The patient died, but the operation was a success."

@readandlearn
I cannot understand what that endocrinologist did. It is a fact that people that have their thyroid zapped have to take Levothyroxine daily, it replicates natural thyroid functioning, controlling metabolism, growth, and energy levels.

My wife had some thyroid problems and they considered killing it and told her she would have been on a daily pill for the rest of her life. Why didn’t your doctor know that fact?

Incredible!!!

Laetrile isn’t approved for anything and can cause cyanide poisoning. So many people go down to Mexico and take it, Only to find it is useless when they are about to die or their cancer gets significantly worse. I’ve been hearing about the bogus use of Laetrile for 30 or 40 years.

@kujhawk1978 "For example, after I completed triplet therapy, I experienced a five year PFS period. Now if I was taking the things you describe during that treatment or PFS period, how do you distinguish if they had any impact...!?"

IF I had been granted another 3rd PSA test prior to surgery, and my level had significantly dropped, I could have (and probably would have) drawn the colloquial conclusion that FenBen and IVR had contributed to or caused the drop. (Either that or answered prayers.) Because this was the ONLY change implemented in my life. (IF this occurred, I'm wise enough to know that I'd be wasting my time trying to convince anyone of how I achieved my personal results, so I'd share my story and leave it at that.)

My life isn't a clinical study, and I don't have to follow strict guidelines when making personal decisions. Outside of my radiation + ADT and prostatectomy surgical options, the medical community provided me with zero possible cancer combating protocols, medications, vitamins, or supplements, etc. I read enough colloquial evidence about these meds to seek them out. They are safe if not taken in mass quantities. They are also relatively inexpensive and obtainable. So, I implemented them, have zero regrets, and I'd do it again.

@cxracer
That's a good dissertation and I've had similar experiences re: supplemental treatment. "Herb" is a four-letter word to many MD's...I had also received no information regarding even the type, pathways, etc, so took it upon myself to research deeply the mechanisms of the cancer itself as well as certain herbs that act similarly on AR receptors, pathways, etc, etc...

Odd, when asked "what are you doing?" when doing so well managing the cancer I gave them a list, and the response was "well, you can't prove or disprove"... ...

True enough technically, but I take them anyway and firmly believe they help, at the least, keep the cancer 'at bay'. And I disagree on semantics...I find I AM a walking individual clinical trial (??!!)...LOL, although not humorous!

Many don't realize that a large percentage of Pharmaceuticals are, in fact, plant based. Even Taxotere (Chemotherapy) is a plant-based alkaloid!

I applaud you for thinking outside a non-existent box. Keep up this way of thinking. Mindset is everso important. My cancer is, because of the stage, deemed "incurable"...My atitude?..."I'll show you!!!"... ...

Blessings

I've posted these before...but, may be time to drag them out again...

Tips to be your own best researcher, https://ancan.org/helpful-tips-to-be-your-own-best-medical-researcher/

Anecdotal Evidence - information that has been observed by the person reporting but not verified. Be skeptical of anecdotal evidence such as personal stories. It is not scientifically reliable. Focus on information supported by scientific evidence and clinical studies.

The quality levels of evidence from highest to lowest for medical data are:

Systematic reviews: collect and evaluate all available data/evidence within the researchers’ criteria. An example is the “Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews”. Meta studies are a systematic review.

Randomized controlled trials: participants are randomly assigned to experimental and control arms. The double-blind trial is the gold-standard of medical research where neither the participants nor the researchers know the placebo or medication/treatment is given. This is to prevent bias and to ensure the validity and reliability of the study.

Cohort observational study: participants with common traits or exposure to the proposed medications or treatments are followed over a long period of time.

Case study or report: a detailed report of result after treatment of an individual. This is formalized and reviewed anecdotal evidence.

Phases of medical trial studies cited by published medical papers:

Pre-clinical studies: laboratory experiments using cell cultures, animal or computer models. In vitro means tested In Vitro – literally ‘in glass’ means testing outside a living organism, in a test tube or petri dish, In Vivo – literally in life -means testing in a living organism, often mice. Then studies move on to humans…

Phase I trials: assess safety, dosage and side effects of the proposed medications or treatment.

Phase II trials: expand P 1 to evaluate efficacy of the proposed medications or treatment – how well it works..

Phase III trials: confirm efficacy, safety, dosage and to evaluate side effects of the proposed medications or treatment in much larger samples. This is often where randomized blind and double blind design is used. Blind means the patient does not know what they are getting; double blind means neither the patient nor the clinician know what is being dosed.

Phase IV trials: monitor long term effectiveness and safety of the medication or treatment.

Some terms regarding statistical data cited in medical journals are explained as follows:
N = number of participants: be wary of studies with a very low N.
HR = hazard ratio: HR=1 – there is no change in the proposed medication/treatment compared to control baseline. HR< 1 – there is a reduction of risks with the proposed medication/treatment. HR>1 – there is an increase risk with the proposed medication/treatment.
CI = Confidence Interval: A trial shows that a particular drug has a 20% effect within a certain time frame with 95% CI. This shows that the study, if repeated many times, it will be 95% confident that the 20% reduction will be consistently observed.
P-value = Probability Value: This measures how strong the evidence is that the hypothesis, or effect being tested, is correct, rather than the result being random, or incorrect (null hypothesis). We seek a P-value that is < =0.05 meaning that there is a 95% or better likelihood the result is attributable to what is being tested.

I'm here 12+ years after diagnosis in part because I've stuck with the science.

That's not just my PCa, Afib, TIA, DVT and PE..

Kevin

@cxracer
That's a good dissertation and I've had similar experiences re: supplemental treatment. "Herb" is a four-letter word to many MD's...I had also received no information regarding even the type, pathways, etc, so took it upon myself to research deeply the mechanisms of the cancer itself as well as certain herbs that act similarly on AR receptors, pathways, etc, etc...

Odd, when asked "what are you doing?" when doing so well managing the cancer I gave them a list, and the response was "well, you can't prove or disprove"... ...

True enough technically, but I take them anyway and firmly believe they help, at the least, keep the cancer 'at bay'. And I disagree on semantics...I find I AM a walking individual clinical trial (??!!)...LOL, although not humorous!

Many don't realize that a large percentage of Pharmaceuticals are, in fact, plant based. Even Taxotere (Chemotherapy) is a plant-based alkaloid!

I applaud you for thinking outside a non-existent box. Keep up this way of thinking. Mindset is everso important. My cancer is, because of the stage, deemed "incurable"...My atitude?..."I'll show you!!!"... ...

Blessings

@deccakid "Odd, when asked "what are you doing?" when doing so well managing the cancer I gave them a list, and the response was "well, you can't prove or disprove"... ..."

YES!!! And they scrunch up their faces like they're smelling a fart, and say it with a snooty and condescending tone.

Like there's hostility from those who strictly follow the guidance of the 'professionals' without performing any due diligence or taking any chances. Because this mindset never gets anyone in trouble...

You're right, I can't prove anything to you, and I don't feel compelled to. I'm not doing it for you. I'm doing it for me, and something is obviously working. Let's look at what changes have been implemented. Well what do you know, the only implemented change has been THIS. Hmm.

This is my first experience with cancer, but is not my first rodeo when it comes to being a better advocate for myself than the 'professionals'.