HCG "causing" Cancer

I just did a bit of research on HCG causing cancer for a friend on Facebook.  I wanted to be sure to share it here, as well, since it seems to be a BIG controversy.  HCG, in general, is controversial just for the bit that it's not "FDA Approved for Weight Reduction."  That being said, here's what I found...

Question:

I didn't want to post this on the feed...don't want to put it out there. I have heard there is a connection with the hCG injections causing cancer cells to multiply quickly. According to this Dr. cancer cells exist in some people's bodies and our immune system will naturally attack them, but when hCG is introduced our immune system will not attack because it is designed to not attack the baby (the foreign matter). I was hoping you had some info. to counter this claim. The reports I have found say homeopathic hCG is very safe and was wondering if you had any information to confirm that. Thank you, Becky

Findings:

• Homeopathics are very safe, yes. The key to why they're so safe is also the biggest thing that doctors who don't understand them say they don't work. There is such a tiny amount (or none) of the original substance that it's like taking water. There's speculation that homeopathics work on the same quantum physics principles as nanotechnology, but it's still speculation.
•  HCG is *always* in our systems, both men and women. It's hard for me to accept the statement, logically, that HCG (Rx or Homeopathic) is going to increase cancer cells like this. However! I will look into it and get more information about it, then get back to you.
• http://ehealthforum.com/health/cancer-e285.html  Of note in this article: "What causes cancer? Doctors still don't understand this disease and are doing their best to uncover causes..."
• General symptom of cancer: weight gain or loss with no known reason Many doctors don't consider HCG to work (especially since a majority of them side with the FDA instead of their eyes) - for them, an HCG diet would be "no known reason."
• Among the "cures" for cancer, including chemotherapy, radiation therapy, biological therapy, support group, and surgery, is also hormone therapy.
  
  Here's what ehealthforum says about that:
  
  "Hormone therapy
  Because some types of cancer require certain hormones in order to grow, the reduction of these hormones is considered effective treatment. Medication may be given to suppress the body's hormones, or hormone-producing organs may be removed (e.g. the testicles or ovaries). Both men and women can experience side effects of this treatment as hormones are removed from the body. Women may experience hot flashes, for example. And, men may experience breast tenderness and growth."
• "Risk for ovarian cancer in women that use this drug for weight loss is far less present than in women who used this drug as a fertility treatment."
• "It is believed that HCG has protective effect for breast cancer."
• "This substance [HCG] is produced and secreted by certain types of cancer, that is why its measurement in blood is a marker for cancer presence (HCG is a tumor marker)."
• This doctor is showing that HCG may be the key to ending breast cancer: http://labs.fccc.edu/bcrl/biographies/irma-Russo.html
• ‎"As published (56-64), a cancer of any primary, when advanced, can produce hCG-like material. This is most commonly the free ß-subunit of hCG, as detected in serum samples, and its degradation product, ß-core fragment as detected in urine samples (56-64). Research now shows that advanced cancers not only produce free ß-subunit, but use the free ß-subunit to promote cancer cell growth and metastases. New vaccines are undoing clinical trial throughout the world. These generate an antibody to the free ß-subunit which removes free ß-subunit and stops it from promoting cancer growth. Hopefully these vaccines will be available by prescription in the near future. Cancer is a simple explanation for a positive hCG or pregnancy test, with no obvious pregnancy. The USA hCG Reference Service identifies cancer cases by the finding that >60% of the total hCG reactivity in serum is free ß-subunit, and by the supportive finding that >60% of the total hCG in urine is free ß-subunit or hCG ß-core fragment. If cancer is found a full malignancy work up, MRI of the head and pelvis and CT scan of the chest, and cancer blood work (blood cell checked for lymphoma and leukemia) is strongly indicated to find the cancer primary (can be anywhere in body)." From http://hcglab.com/

Mainewellness.com released a pdf statement saying:

"Does HCG cause cancer?
Individuals (including health professionals) who don’t understand the Dr. Simeons HCG
protocol or who are biased against the use of HCG for weight reduction may say a variety
of things with the purpose of discouraging people from using HCG for weight reduction.
One of the things that they may say is that HCG causes cancer.
Here are the facts about the relationship between HCG and cancer:

• HCG does not cause cancer or stimulate growth of tumors. 
• There are some tumors that produce HCG (but HCG did not cause these tumors). 

They include choriocarcinomas, germ cell tumors, teratomas, and islet cell
tumors.
It appears that some individuals have a double standard with regard to the medical use
of HCG:

• Mainstream medicine has approved and accepted the use of HCG for use in fertility treatments. The dosages used for fertility treatments are significantly higher compared to those used for weight reduction. 
• Mainstream medicine has approved the use of HCG for boys who are sexually underdeveloped. 

Pregnant women make the equivalent of millions of units of HCG. Pregnant women do
not have an increased risk of cancer during or following pregnancy. If HCG causes cancer, why aren’t we advising expectant mothers of this danger? BECAUSE HCG DOES
NOT CAUSE CANCER!
From this website: http://drbloem.com/treatment-options/dr-simeons-hcg-diet/hcg-dietfaqs/"

 And, that same site is publishing some of the findings on HCG helping to get rid of cancer.

*********

Summary/MY Opinion:

I suppose, in my head, this small bit of research clears up the concept of HCG causing cancer.  I especially like the statement, "If HCG causes cancer, why aren’t we advising expectant mothers of this danger? BECAUSE HCG DOES NOT CAUSE CANCER!"

It *does,* however, look like if you have particular types of cancer that *already* emit HCG, it's best to discuss the HCG protocol with your cancer doctor in those cases (lymphoma and leukemia) before running with it.

HomeopathicHCG Theory/Hypothesis

Questions

• Based on the facts posted previously, should we be mixing the potencies of HHCG the way we do when we take the drops?
• If we stopped mixing the potencies, would we be able to correct the slowdown encountered, typically, in week two?  Would we be able to lose, the whole time, at the very high rates encountered during the first 10 days?
• Should we start out with 3x, await the slowdown period then move up to 6x, await another slowdown period and move up to 10x, and so on?

Jayme's Theory/Hypothesis

Dosing by individual potencies, rather than mixing potencies into a single dose, will enable us to maintain higher rates of fat loss throughout the entire Protocol.



Proposed Test Design
During the next round, I'm going to make my own HHCG and take it one potency at a time to observe the effects a single dose has on the weight loss process.  I shall take the one potency until the day my weight loss drops below one full pound, then on that day move up to the next potency.  I have an outline of what I think will happen, and will update with actual data as I move along in my test.

Potency	Anticipated Days Taken	Actual Days Taken
LM 0/1	10	.
LM 0/2	10	.
LM 0/3	8	.
LM 0/5.5	10	.
LM 0/11	10	.

Resources:

1. Picture depicting that my theory/hypothesis is sound:  http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/content/full/49/5/808 

Homeopathic Discussion

I've come up with a theory on HHCG.  It's not new, per se, but the theory does challenge how we're using it today (ie: a combination of 6x, 12x, 30x, and 60x strengths 2-3 times daily).  In fact, it's taking the homeopathic quality of HHCG back to it's roots.

Recently, I completed the Homeopathy Course offered by Breyer State University.  In it, you learn homeopathy's history, the basis of why it works, all about doses, what foods to avoid or add to the diet, and a ton of other things about it.  It took several books, each over 1000 pages to say what I'm theorizing, really.  Regardless, I'm going to go out on a limb here and state that we're not using Homeopathy as it was intended originally.  We've strayed from the pure path and muddied the waters, so to speak.

Interesting Facts about Homeopathy

• Less is more.
• Potency numbers reflect how many times the original substance has been diluted.
• Potency numbers can be labeled as some number followed by an X, M, or C.
• Making a homeopathic remedy is really pretty easy, just time consuming. A video on the process is here:
• To cure an illness with homeopathy, one must be highly skilled in observation.
• Homeopathy was first proposed by German physician Samuel Hahnemann in 1796, based on an "ipse dixit" axiom formulated by Hahnemann, which he called the law of similars, preparations which cause certain symptoms in healthy individuals are given in diluted form to patients who already exhibit similar symptoms.
• Homeopathic remedies are always given as needed.  If one does clears the case - if the patient's overall energy improves and th symptoms of illness fall away - then by all means do not give a second dose.  If the first dose seems to help some, then watch for a return of symptoms and a falling off of the overall energy, then give the second dose.4

References:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy
2. http://www.altmd.com/Articles/How-Homeopathy-Cures
3. http://www.altmd.com/Videos/Search/homeopathy
4. Practical Homeopathy by Vinton McCabe

VLCD: Discussion of Fatty Fish

While I was following the VLCD part, I had lots of questions about my recipes containing Orange Roughy, which, according to one popular writer of HCG books, is a "fatty fish." What I'd really like to do is examine these thoughts.

First, the main tool I use when looking up nutrition about a food - especially one that doesn't come from the store with a label - is http://www.nutritiondata.com/. It's a *great* way to check up on facts for yourself rather than taking someone else's word for what the facts are. I encourage you to investigate for yourself!!

When you find your food, be sure to set your serving size and look for the raw food, as that's what we're supposed to be weighing to eat.

So, I wanted to take a look at one other meat, hamburger, that's called out on *all* versions of allowed foods that I've seen, and compare it to Orange Roughy.

Hamburger (95/5): http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/beef-products/6188/2

Orange Roughy: http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/finfish-and-shellfish-products/4099/2

Mostly, I want to take a look at the fat content of each protien. Hamburger, even very very lean, has 5g of fat in 100g of meat. Orange Roughy, the "fatty fish," has a single gram of fat in 100g of meat.

So, I don't eat veal, but it's another protein on the "allowed" list for all the lists I've seen. The data on it is startling, when considering that we're supposed to cut out all fats:

http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/lamb-veal-and-game-products/4740/2

Wow! In 100g of breast meat, there's over 200 calories and a whopping 15g of fat.

When comparing the other allowed meats to the "fatty fish" to see if it's a good choice or not, it becomes pretty clear that compared to the other allowed meats, even a fatty white fish is better than most of them!

Discussion: Why do some lose more than others?

Since August, I've been watching a lot of people, myself included, release a lot of pounds. Some lose it slower, some lose it faster. I happened to be one that lost fast - this round. Next round might be different, though. My question is simple: Why?

I think that part of the reason has to be emotional ties to our weight. Maybe another reason is stress and anxiety. Perhaps another reason could be medications that might slow loss. A fourth could be as simple as desire & expectations. Still a whole different reason is one that most people overlook completely - the body-mind-spirit connection.

I've mentioned a few times what my emotional tie to my weight was. I say "was" because I've done some tough emotional work, complete with tears, to get to the point where I can be honest with the reason I "needed" the weight. I used it as a shield to keep people away so I wouldn't get hurt. It was as simple as that. It was as complex as that.

Continued over here...

Model A or Taurus? Which would you choose TODAY?

To begin with, I knew absolutely nothing of HCG except that it promised to reset the "fat meter," as I called it, in your brain and make your body think it's a skinny body. :) I didn't look into the foods allowed or any of that stuff, as I have a nutritionalist that I've worked with for years and have a strong trust with. She got the drops for me, as well as gave me a list of "approved" foods. I don't know who approved them. From the get go on the HCG diet, these were the foods I was allowed. http://lessofmehcg.blogspot.com/2009/08/overview-of-what-we-get-to-eat.html

It was only then that I got involved with forums and boards. It took me almost a full month to come to the realization that of everyone losing weight adding HCG to their diets, we were categorized into three groups:

1. Dr. Simeon Protocol
2. Kevin Trudeau Protocol
3. A local "clinic" protocol

Where food choices were concerned, I fell into category three. I strongly referenced category one and added the vitamins from category two.

I figure that our food system has changed dramatically from the one that Dr. Simeon knew. His protocol is still valid, of course, I would never dispute that! But if we equate the three groups to cars, we'd have:

1. Ford Model A
2. 1957 Ford Wagon
3. 1980 Ford Taurus

If you were allowed only one vehicle to drive - TODAY - which would you choose? There's no disputing that Ford and his original ideas were brilliant. There's no disputing that there's much of the concepts of the first car in the second. Nor is there any disputing that there's concepts of the first and second cars in the third car. I think that there's much room still for improvement and, perhaps, some day, a fourth "car" will be released. However, there will still be those people who will continue to state that the original car is the best and they've chosen to stay with it - and they'll call the people who are using the newer cars fools or tell them it'll never work for them. There will always be people like that, regardless of how sad it is.

From day one, I was "driving" the third car. It's the latest and greatest and all the "car salesmen" want you in that one. There's something to be said for the Ford Model A - concepts, lines, ideas... But, compared to the Taurus, little to be said for the Model A's bumpy ride, lack of air conditioning & wind shield wipers. Likewise, there's something to be said for Dr. Simeon's original injection concept and food list. But, compared to homeopathics and more food choices, it's really in the same boat as the Model A is in compared to the Taurus.

Over all, I'm very pleased with the results I've had while in group three. There are people, following either group one or two, who tell me that I'll not succeed and that I've not succeeded until I've kept it off for at least a year. They can't spoil the results that I've already had, though, and the fact that I'm stable in my new weight. It does fluctuate up or down inside that two pounds and, if I push too much (like a meal at Skippers!), I do gain more than those two pounds and "have" to eat a great big steak the following day.

The point is, regardless of which group you've chosen, the remaining two groups have just as much success. It's just a matter of how strict you wish to be with yourself. For me, who has at least two more rounds planned, I know that I'd never be able to succeed at staying with it with just the foods on the more strict diets. I need flavor and variety. Not only did the foods on the list I got from my nutritionalist give me that, but I got through the process still feeling like I could do that another two times. Or even three times!

HCG, the original protocol, worked like a charm. However, Dr. Simeon stated that you had to stop losing if you hit a 34# loss. He never stated why; that was just his rule. I lost 47# my first round. There are people who are doing a continuous round - HCG VLCD until they lose the full amount they set out to lose! And I say congratulations to them all! But it isn't the original protocol. It's not the Model A.

I guess, what I'm trying to say is that there is no one way to get to the finish line. We aren't all the same. We don't all have to follow exactly what the others do. We just need to make it work in our own lives and get healthy.