Anaximperator blog

Blogging against alternative cancer treatments

Jenny McCarthy says: HBOT prevents cancer

jenny-mccarthy1

 HBOT – Hyberbaric Oxigen Therapy – is used to treat diseases for which decreased blood flow or a low oxygenation is major part of the problem and for which higher oxygen tension could help. 

HO is useful for a number of problems, but cancer is not one of them.

However, Jenny McCarthy, never one to be daunted by the facts, on April 14 told the audience on the Ellen de Generes Show that HBOT chambers “prevent cancer.” She also advised people to buy one from a certain company.

We think it is deplorable that she should say such a thing. She already caused enough damage with her campaign “against autism.”

So please God, make this woman shut up.

About these ads

30 responses to “Jenny McCarthy says: HBOT prevents cancer

  1. evenarsenicisnatural April 15, 2009 at 1:30 pm

    So Mizz Titz is now a cancer expert too, eh?

    Silicon poisoning is a terrible thing indeed.

    Run, Jim, run!!

  2. beatis April 15, 2009 at 2:24 pm

    Not only is she part-silicon, she doesn’t mind botox either.

    Also, she had her son circumcised for no other reason than that she wanted him to have “a pretty penis.”

    When she was still an indigo mom and her son a crystal child (or the other way round, I keep forgetting) she said on her then website that indigo/crystal children often were misdiagnosed with autism. How strange is that?

    What baffles me most however is how people like her can generate so much admiration.

  3. Rich April 15, 2009 at 7:02 pm

    I’m not so sad that they took the Mercury out of vaccines. The stuff isn’t good for you, even in low concentrations.

    http://msds.chem.ox.ac.uk/ME/mercury_II_acetate.html
    “Highly toxic – may be fatal if swallowed, inhaled or absorbed through the skin. CNS poison. May affect fertility. May cause allergic reactions. Very destructive of mucous membranes. Typical TLV 0.05 mg m-1″

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_poisoning
    “It damages the central nervous system, endocrine system, kidneys, and other organs, and adversely affects the mouth, gums, and teeth. Exposure over long periods of time or heavy exposure to mercury vapor can result in brain damage and ultimately death.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal_controversy

    http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/environmentprotect/pbt/chemicals/mercury.htm

    *****
    Jenny McCarthy is an interesting case study, though. Her son had autism. She went to a naturopath. The naturopathic treatment for autism is treat for heavy metals and fungus.

    So that’s chellation therapy followed by antifungals. Her real doctors re-tested the boy for autism, and said they’ve never seen such a recovery.
    Note: Chellation therapy will remove all metals, including Iron, Zinc, etc… and can cause anemia and other problems. Don’t try this one at home without a real doctor supervising.

    I think it’s great that she wants to raise $100 million to put this non-patentable treatment through clinical trials.

    As I said, sometimes these Naturopaths do miraculous things.
    *****
    On the cancer thing, these naturopaths always seem to get in trouble when they try to cure cancer. A mistake in hypertension is one thing. A mistake on cancer may mean death.

    It would seem that JM is just repeating her naturopath’s remedy for cancer. If she had cured a cancer with this therapy, maybe she would have some credibility.

  4. evenarsenicisnatural April 15, 2009 at 7:29 pm

    How convenient that she doesn’t mention the smoking /drinking (and probable drugs) during her pregnancy…

    She doesn’t endorse the ‘indigo’ or ‘crystal’ crap anymore, wishful thinking on her part that it no longer exists so she ignores it.

    Barnum was so right, there’s one born every minute.

  5. evenarsenicisnatural April 15, 2009 at 7:34 pm

    Rich: Check this site out in regard to naturopathologicals…

    http://scienceblogs.com/whitecoatunderground/

  6. beatis April 15, 2009 at 7:35 pm

    @ Rich,

    Chellation therapy will remove all metals, including Iron, Zinc, etc… and can cause anemia and other problems.

    As far as I know, the amounts in vaccines were no more than trace amounts, not nearly enough to cause any problems.

    What I find very odd is that these children undergoing chelation therapy, the amounts of “metals” that are eliminated, are always much larger than the amounts that they received through the vaccines.

    Spreading the vaccines, such as JM suggests, would only lead to a bigger intake of bad stuff.

    BTW, I found this poster of the March of Dimes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_of_Dimes

    It moved me very much. I don’t know how old you are, but I can remember seeing quite a lot of people like this when I was little. And they were the lucky ones, for they had survived! My cousin died of of meningitis – a complications of her measles infection – when she was five.

    These were horrible diseases and I truly think vaccinations are a great blessing.

    I also think the question should not be: can thimoresol, mercury etc. be dangerous. We all know they can, provided the amounts are high enough. That’s why there is a little as possible of them in vaccines. And this is not thanks to JM and her band; the amounts have been lowered long before that.

    The question should be I think: do vaccines cause autism. And for that there seems to be no evidence.

  7. beatis April 15, 2009 at 7:46 pm

    Yes. A sucker, that is. And there’s a crook born every hour to take care of 60 suckers, so I read somewhere. :-)

  8. Rich April 15, 2009 at 8:46 pm

    “The question should be I think: do vaccines cause autism. And for that there seems to be no evidence.”
    – I agree on this point.

    Since I have endorsed that a naturopathic remedy may work for some cases of Autism, what would I personally do?

    These metametrix guys seem to have some good new computer testing abilities for Autism, so I’d go there first, before going to a naturopath (Buyer Beware). Let them create a real case study on the topic, using real doctors.

    http://www.metametrix.com/content/LearningCenter/CaseStudies/384.html
    http://www.metametrix.com/resources/content/LearningCenter/CaseStudies/GI-Effects-Autistic-Child-Case-Study.pdf

    *****
    There are lots of different heavy metals that can cause human diseases, though. Here is a neat new study on Parkinson’s and Manganese Poisoning:
    Link Found Between Parkinson’s Disease Genes And Manganese Poisoning:
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090201141559.htm

  9. Rich April 17, 2009 at 4:59 am

    Vaccines have erradicated terrible diseases like Polio. They are sometimes miraculous. There are some vaccines that you simply don’t skip.

    Some communities, like the amish in Pennsylvania don’t get vaccines… and they are not terribly high in disease. This is not always an absolute science. I don’t have enough knowledge to comment on vaccines.

    On Flu shots, however, these have been off recently with something like a 2% prevention rate(they have to guess on the popular virus, 2 years ahead of time, and recently have guessed wrong)… and some of these contain the thimerosol. For me personally, I’m skipping the flu shot.

  10. beatis April 17, 2009 at 8:20 am

    Contrary to general belief, the Amish do vaccinate. Also, their autism rate appears to be lower:
    http://tinyurl.com/bzpvch

  11. Pingback: HBOT: don’t try this at home « Anax blog

  12. Bram Hengeveld June 1, 2009 at 3:31 pm

    A comment on Rich: In the first place I don’t think it’s possible to give such a number on ‘prevention rate’. Prevention of what? And in which ageclass? Which of the viruses? For all I know, 2% is a strange number, even when vaccine match is poor. In healthy adults vaccines (of which there are also a number of types, so that also adds to the question regarding 2%) are way more effective in preventing influenza or even ILI.
    Nevertheless is must be noted that certain scientific knowledge concerning fluvaccines is a bit flimsy. But 2%… Neh, I’d like to see a source of that. Also vaccines are produced annually and ‘guessing’ is not a good way of describing the selection of strains that are to be put in the vaccine, but mismatches indeed do happen. Vaccineproduction thus happens every year (not 2 years ahead) and is done by WHO GISN.

    I think people who are risk-aware should choose fluvaccination over supposed thimerosal dangers anytime.
    Thinking the other way around would, for instance, wreak havoc on your ‘fun life’, since the minute chance that you’ll die in traffic (which is far more likely than dying of a flushot, or getting damaged by the thimerosal in it) will keep you in your home. In which, of course, a meteor might smite thee, so perhaps you shouldn’t do that either. The chance of getting the flu (and spreading it) on the other hand is far more likely, even without knowing it.

  13. beatis June 1, 2009 at 7:23 pm

    Hi Bram,

    Good to see you!

    Obviously, it seems certain basics in medicine – and perhaps in life in general for that matter – are often hard to understand for certain people, such as the balancing of risks and the fact that 100% side-effect-proof is simply too much to wish for.

  14. Dr.Hart November 16, 2009 at 5:31 pm

    It is sad that any uneducated and uninformed person can create a “blog” for people to read.

    Please actually research HBOT and cancer before
    you open your mouth with your blog. I am the director of a Hyperbaric Center and the effects for cancer and autism are profound. Please educate yourself.

  15. jennyj0 November 16, 2009 at 5:32 pm

    Perhaps you can provide us with some decent evidence for your claims. We have not been able to find any.

  16. anaximperator November 16, 2009 at 8:32 pm

    Regarding HBOT and autism, the research by Rossignol seems to be the most cited:
    http://tinyurl.com/y8t4s24
    This has received considerable criticism though:
    http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=249
    http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/492-hyperbaric-oxygen-for-autism-not-so-fast.html
    Perhaps you’d care to reply to this?

    Regarding HBOT and cancer we have not been able to find anything worth citing here in our opinion.

  17. jli November 16, 2009 at 9:45 pm

    Okay – let us do a bit of self education. One way to do that is to go to http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed , to see what a search on the terms HBOT and cancer will show us. Of the 16 references only two deals with the effect on cancer treatment.
    The most recent was published in2009 in “International Journal of Radiation OncologyBiologyPhysics”. In the results section it says:

    Three findings indicate that HBOT increases the risk of cancer re-recurrence. First, we observed more cancer re-recurrences in the HBOT group than in the non-HBOT group: 9 of 11 vs. 4 of 11, with 5-year disease-free survival rates after salvage of 32.7% vs. 70.0% (hazard ratio 3.2; 95% confidence interval 1.03-10.7; p = 0.048). Second, re-recurrences developed rapidly after HBOT in 6 patients. Third, 3 patients had unusual cancer re-recurrences after HBOT

    The other`one is a cochrane review from 2005. It focuses on the ability of HBOT to enhance the effect of radiotherapy. In the conclusion it says:

    There is some evidence that HBO improves local tumour control and mortality for cancers of the head and neck, and local tumour recurrence in cancers of the head and neck, and uterine cervix. These benefits may only occur with unusual fractionation schemes. HBO is associated with significant adverse effects including oxygen toxic seizures and severe tissue radiation injury. The methodological and reporting inadequacies of the studies included demand a cautious interpretation.

    Based on the current evidence, the claim of a profound effect of HBOT effect on cancer seems to be a bit of an exaggeration.

  18. evenarsenicisnatural November 17, 2009 at 5:31 am

    “Dr.” Hart babbled:

    “It is sad that any uneducated and uninformed person can create a “blog” for people to read.

    Please actually research HBOT and cancer before
    you open your mouth with your blog. I am the director of a Hyperbaric Center and the effects for cancer and autism are profound. Please educate yourself.”

    Yeah, and any schmuck can peddle worthless shit with false credentials and exploit others just to turn a buck.

  19. evenarsenicisnatural November 17, 2009 at 5:43 am

    Ohhh…will the intrepid “Dr.” Hart ever be heard from again, or will it return with a steaming pile of “testimonials” ?

    Don’t hold your breath, folks.

  20. beatis November 17, 2009 at 6:17 am

    Based on the current evidence, the claim of a profound effect of HBOT effect on cancer seems to be a bit of an exaggeration.

    Now there’s an understatement if ever I saw one! You are being extremely tactful jli. :-)

    To quote dr Hart’s own words: “It is sad that any uneducated and uninformed person can create so many emtpy claims for people to read.”

    @Evenarsenisisnatural:

    Yeah, and any schmuck can peddle worthless shit with false credentials and exploit others just to turn a buck.

    QFT.

  21. jli November 17, 2009 at 4:36 pm

    Now there’s an understatement if ever I saw one! You are being extremely tactful jli. :-)

    I know, but being blunt would be like kicking someone who is lying down. He is a guy who is financially dependent on using HBOT. And his request to do research resulted in retrieval of data (from people with access to, but financial independence of HBOT) that totally demolishes the basis of his business. So now it is crystal clear that his rant against you was totally moronic. So to save gain some dignity he will have to come forward and apologize to you. :mrgreen:

  22. beatis November 17, 2009 at 5:15 pm

    Isn’t that called rubbing it in…?

  23. Carmen November 30, 2009 at 7:08 pm

    Anyone else hear about Jenny’s Book, “Louder Than Words: A Mother’s Journey of Healing….” possibly stealing lines and thoughts from a manuscript a mother of an autistic child had sent to publishers a few years before McCarthy had her book published? Very creepy. What’s more disturbing is the mum who had sent manuscript to all these publishers had gone through years of pain and suffering trying to help her son, and yet, McCarthy tells everyone ‘she had her ass kicked by autism” , but doesn’t anyone see by the time her son was, what, 4? About two years after he was “diagnosed”….he was cured, she wrote a book and was all over media. Two years? Pleeeassseee…..somebody please tell me we aren’t all this stupid. And what quack doctor diagnosed her kid? It’s also interesting Jenny says vaccines are dangerous and can cause autism but she sure has a face filled with Botox.

  24. beatis November 30, 2009 at 7:44 pm

    I haven’t heard of Jenny McCarthy plagiarizing but it would not surprise me at all. I also doubt very much whether her son was ever autistic. It’s just not possible to cure a child of autism. Sometimes children “outgrow” their autism while growing up, but this is relatively rare, is always a slow process which takes many years and it cannot be brought about by diet and chelation.

    She has done such a tremendous amount of harm, to autistic children, to their parents and to children who should be vaccinated. She makes people believe autism can be cured dwith all manner of quackery. With her triumphant babble she makes parents who don’t succeed in curing their autistic child look like utter failures.

    Also, thanks to this woman, there are regions in the USA (and the UK as well, sadly) where vaccination rates are so low that for the first time in many years children are at a real risk of contracting these diseases that were practically eradicated. I really think Ms McCarthy woman is a danger to public health.

  25. beatis December 1, 2009 at 7:11 pm

    @ Carmen:

    This might interest you: Early autism intervention in toddlers is effective – http://bit.ly/4N2quF

    Jenny clearly has not the faintest idea what she is talking about. Deplorable.

  26. Tara December 28, 2011 at 2:34 am

    Healthy cells can become cancerous within 2 days in an oxygen deficient environment. HBOT combats that scenario and has proved profoundly beneficial for individuals with ASD and other health concerns. Only it’s expense has prevented wider use of this technology.
    YOUR misinformation is seriously harmful.

    Please God, make this anaxaximidiot shut up.

  27. beatis December 28, 2011 at 6:31 am

    Healthy cells can become cancerous within 2 days in an oxygen deficient environment. HBOT combats that scenario (…)

    Can you provide us with some evidence for your claim please? And can you explain just what this should imply for the treatment of cancer?

    Depriving a tumour of oxygen – by destroying the blood vessels leading to it – will kill most cancer cells. However, while most cancer cells die or at least stop growing when they are deprived of oxygen, some survive, and tumour cells that manage to survive hypoxic conditions are often the cells that are most aggressive, most resistant to therapy, and most likely to have mutations that enable them to spread easily.

    Feeding a tumour with extra oxygen – by stimulating angiogenesis – will not kill it, on the contrary, it generally makes it grow even faster, which is not good. Small comfort is that it makes it better to treat with current therapies.

    So what should we do, oxygen wise? Please enlighten us!

  28. jli December 28, 2011 at 11:09 am

    …… and tumour cells that manage to survive hypoxic conditions are often the cells that are most aggressive, most resistant to therapy, and most likely to have mutations that enable them to spread easily.

    Feeding a tumour with extra oxygen – by stimulating angiogenesis – will not kill it, on the contrary, it generally makes it grow even faster, which is not good. Small comfort is that it makes it better to treat with current therapies.

    Exactly – This is the context in which HBOT in theory could be beneficial. And researchers have looked into this. Here is a review from 2006: http://www.springerlink.com/content/77575536k0463738/fulltext.pdf To quote from the conclusion:

    Most of the literature indicates that HBO has no impact on tumor growth—be it stimulatory or inhibitory. The most convincing effects are observed when HBO is used in an adjuvant setting, but this is specific to the tumor’s type and stage. HBO therefore remains ineffective as a stand-alone therapy or even as a reliable adjuvant.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 136 other followers

%d bloggers like this: