RESULTS The options available to cancer patients are many and it is very anxiety provoking to try to figure out what the "Truth" Is about the various therapies including conventional treatment I hope to address some of these issues In this paper and to present facts that may help you in the decision process. The first decision many people have to make is whether to use alternative medicine or standard treatment There are very few cancers that conventional treatment has definitively made great strides in treating. These cancers are gestational trophoblastic tumors, acute lymphoblastic leukemia, Hodgkin's disease, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (in children), diffuse large cell lymphoma, Burkitt's lymphoma and testicular tumors. All these cancers comprise about 10% of the total cancers. For the other 90% the evidence of successful treatment with chemotherapy is nonexistent or marginal. The statistical analysis offered by traditional oncologists is often very misleading and must be interpreted with great caution. For instance one argument used to justify the use of chemotherapy is that people are living longer with cancer than they were previously. This in no way proves that conventional treatments are effective since it was In past People are living longer even if they get only supportive cam It Is also true that we are diagnosing people earlier than in previous years so it may appear that they are living longer when in actuality we only know that they have cancer sooner. The fact is there is little evidence that supports the use of chemotherapy in most cancers. There have been very few double blind test investigating one chemotherapeutic agent to another one. In other words there is no control group that gets a placebo (no treatment) so we never really know if people would live as long or longer without chemotherapy. The few studies that do exist that have placebo groups often show no survival advantage over the treatment group. The bottom line is that, as a patient you have the right to know what evidence there is to suggest that a treatment is effective especially if the treatment can kill you. Very often, oncologists will use terms like response rate, or disease free survival to give evidence that chemotherapy is effective. These terms can be very misleading. For instance chemotherapy may be successful in shrinking a particular type of tumor 80% of the time and In some cases may even make the tumor so small that the cancer apparently goes away. To the average person this may sound very good but the truth is it is deceptive and misleading because tumor response and even disease free survival (Le ... the cancer apparently disappears) does not mean the same thing as overall survival. This means a person who gets chemotherapy may have the tumor shrink, in fact it may even appear to disappear, but this does not mean they will five longer than a person who was not treated with chemotherapy. For this reason the most Important question you should ask your oncologist is: "What proof is there that taking chemotherapy will make me actually live longer than If I did nothing?" The problem with chemotherapy is that it ultimately fans for the same reason it is successful, Le.. it Is a poison. Chemotherapy is very effective in killing cancer cells; however, it also weakens the body's defenses at the same time, so for every point you gain in a dead cancer cells you lose in dead cells of the immune system, the exact system that your body needs to fight the cancer. It is one thing to offer an unproved therapy that will do you no harm but to offer an unproved treatment that can potentially kill you goes beyond reason. The next dilemma cancer patients have once they decide to forgo chemotherapy for alternative methods is which one is best This is often a more difficult question to answer than the Initial one of whether to use traditional treatments or alternative. I can only provide you with the evidence I feel proves that the methods used at The Practice of Emanuel Revici are effective. I have no doubt that there are many other modalities that are effective but I have no way to directly evaluate them and unfortunately to this date there are no studies that have compared the various alternative treatments. Statistics taken directly from a clinic are of questionable value since clinics are not set up as studies and there are many variables that are not controlled for. Therefore if clinic A reports that they have 80% success In treating a particular disorder and clinic B says they have 40% success it would be erroneous to assume that clinic A is better since they may be treating people who are less sick or they may have different criteria for the definition of a successful treatment The Revici method has a 70 year history of experimentation and clinical success. Dr. Revici is a true innovator. His methods are based on a foundation of scientific principles that have evolved into the method currently used. One question frequently asked is that if Dr. Revici's methods are so effective why haven't they been received more favorably by the orthodox medical community. When we see how other great discoveries have been accepted through out history it becomes apparent that the more ground shaking and profound a discoveries, the longer it takes for the orthodox communities to acknowledge its validity. Human bias Is no stranger to medicine and science, and much of what is accepted in medicine today is not based on science but has to do with personal beliefs, politics, and economics. The first study was by Dr. Revici at The Institute of Applied Biology. There were 1047 people in the study, with a large variety of cancers. All patients had very poor prognoses and had exhausted all conventional treatments including, surgery and chemotherapy. Each patient was categorized metabolically as either anabolic or catabolic and then placed on the appropriate compounds. The results of this study showed 41% had a favorable response. Favorable varied from subjective relief of symptoms (improved appetite, decrease in pain, increase In strength and sense of well being), to arresting the progress of disease, diminution of tumors and long term remission. Also there appeared to be a prolongation In life in those patients who responded favorably. After this study Dr. Revici made even greater strides In his therapy and this Is reflected In the Italian study performed by Dr. Pacelli in Naples. This study took place between 1984 and 1990. There were 372 patients, most with extensive metastasis, enrolled. All patients enrolled in the study had life expectancies of less then 90 days and had exhausted all conventional treatments including chemotherapy, radiation and surgery. The results are as follows: Lung cancer: 186 patients. Coughing of blood resolved in 75% of patients who had this symptom. 80% had control of previously uncontrollable pain. 75% gained weight The average life expectancy of these patients was 80 days. Actual average life span was 172 days. 45% of the patients were still living at the end of the study period. The quality of life index increased from 35% to 70%. Intestinal cancer: 57 patients. The average life expectancy was 60 days. The actual survival time averaged 245 days. 21 patients were still living at the end of the study. In addition pain was controlled in 70%. Abdominal fluid decreased an average of 70%. The quality of life Index increased from 30% to 70%. Breast cancer: 53 patients with stage IV cancer. 80% were able to control pain. The average life expectancy was 90 days. Actual average survival was 180 days with 12 patients still living at the end of the study. The quality of life index Increased from 25% to 60%. Uterine cancer: 27 patients. Pain was reduced in 71% of cases. The average life expectancy was 90 days. Actual average survival was 270 days and 9 patients were still living at the end of the study. Quality of life Increased from 35% to 70%. Liver cancer: 26 patients. Most patients gained back significant amounts of weight 65% experienced pain reduction. Average life expectancy was 60 days. Actual average survival was 233 days and 42% were still living at the end of the study. Stomach cancer: 23 patients. 90% of previously uncontrolled pain was controlled. 80% of patients regained weight Average life expectancy was 75 days. Actual survival was 265 days and 9 patients were still living at the end of the study. Methodologically the above studies had shortcomings in the severe condition of the patient control groups, but considering the severe condition of the patients in these studies the results are excellent it is our belief that If a study were conducted with patients in the earlier stages of the disease prior to chemotherapy the results would be even greater. In addition to the above studies there exist many cases treated with Dr. Revici's method who have responded positively. Although it way be argued that this is only anecdotal and does not constitute "scientific" proof the magnitude of the responses and the large number of patients testify to the efficacy of Dr. Revici's treatments. The following cases are illustrative of the way patients have responded to the treatment: 1: 43 year old man with bladder cancer. Biopsy revealed a high grade transitional cell carcinoma. The patient refused cystectomy (removal of the urinary bladder) and was treated only with Dr. Revici's compounds. Seven years later there was no evidence of disease through cystoscopy. 2: 29 year old woman with a chordoma (type of brain tumor). The tumor was partially removed and she was treated with a course of radiation, however the condition progressed and in 12 months she was confined to a wheel chair. After being treated only with Dr. Revici's compounds she was able to walk again and was essentially self sufficient. 3: 30 year old woman with ovarian cancer had a total hysterectomy. At the time of surgery It appeared that all the tumor was removed, but as a precaution she was placed on 6 months of chemotherapy. One year later she developed metastatic disease to the omentum. She began with Dr. Revici's treatment and did well at least 2 years later. 4: 50 year old woman with adenocarcinoma in the left lung. The tumor was inoperable. She received a course of radiation which reduced the tumor. She refused chemotherapy and began with Dr. Revici's treatments. She was hoarse because of the involvement of the recurrent laryngeal nerve. Over the next year her voice returned to normal and she was without symptoms. Radiological assessment showed improvement 5: 34 year old man with giant cell tumor in the left femur. He underwent an above the knee amputation. However he still developed metastasis to the lung and kidney. He opted to use Dr. Revici's compounds. One year later X-rays showed no progression in the lungs, IVP showed almost complete disappearance of the right kidney's mass and the left mass was also smaller. He continues to do well 8 years later. 6: 40 year old woman with small cell cancer of the lung and distant metastasis. She started chemotherapy but stopped after 3 cycles and then started with Dr. Revici. Seven years later she is in apparent remission. 7: 23 year old woman diagnosed with meningioma extending to the left eye, orbit and maxillary sinus. She was treated with radiation. She started with Dr. Revici's treatment and continued to do well 3 years later even though MRI did not show marked decrease in tumor size. 8: 60 year old man with squamous cell cancer of the lung. He was inoperable because of local extension. He was treated with radiation and then started with Dr. Revici's treatments. 3 years later he continued to do well. 9: 53 year old woman with adenocarcinoma of the lung. Her tumor was non-resectable. She received radiation and then saw Dr. Revici. Over the next year her condition improved. Years later she continues without symptoms. 10: 27 year old woman diagnosed with glioblastoma. or astrocytoma (there was some dispute as to the histology) grade 111. She received radiation and surgery and then started with Dr. Revici's treatment Her condition improved and she continued to do well 9 years later. 11: 72 year old woman with infiltrating ductile carcinoma of the breast She underwent mastectomy but cancer was detected in the lymph nodes. Chemotherapy and radiation were refused. 9 years later she is doing well without any signs of cancer and her tumor markers (CA 27.29) are in normal range. These cases represent a small sample of the people we have treated with great results. All of these cases would have been considered "miracles" by the conventional standards. Frequently we are asked by patients If Dr. Revici's method will work with their particular type of cancer. Since the method is geared to work with the metabolic and immunological states that are similar in most cancers, the method Is applicable to cancer in general - all of the common cancers: breast gastric, prostate, lung, ovarian, uterine, head and neck, lymphomas and leukemia, colon, pancreatic, melanoma, liver, bladder, esophageal - as well as some of the less common cancers. Another common request Is that we provide patients with statistics as to various outcomes. We do not provide these numbers because the treatment Is not given in the context of a study; so there are many variables that are not controlled for and that will affect outcomes. Statistical analysis should be applied in a scientific study but as mentioned previously its value in the clinical setting is often misleading. For instance, clinic X way report a success rate of 80% but this may include the most minimal responses. Also, one clinic way screen its patients and not accept patients with a very poor prognosis while another clinic may accept even the sickest patients. Statistically, the clinic who screens the patients will have the better numbers. Because of all the variables, it can be very difficult to compare the results of various clinics. We would suggest using the following as guidelines: 1: Are the methods based on sound reasoning? Is the theoretical basis of the treatment grounded in scientific principles that can be reproduced? 2: Are there studies to support the use of the treatment?. Especially studies that have been done independently of the clinic providing the treatment 3: Are there cases that have responded positively?. These cases should be well documented and responses should be defined. 4: Are there some patients you could talk to who have undergone the treatment? 5: Has the treatment stood the test of time? These are some of the criteria that may be useful in evaluating various treatments. We feel that our center fulfills the above criteria. This Is also true for Independent verification of the Revici method. We are currently Involved in several research projects. Recently several of Dr. Revici's compounds have been approved as investigational drugs by the FDA and clinical trials will be conducted at a major cancer center. In addition we are working with a cancer research lab in a major research facility that is replicating experiments similar to ones Dr. Revici performed 40 years ago. The results of these preliminary studies confirm Dr. Revici's theories. The following is the foreword from the book THE MAN WHO CURED CANCER by Kelly Eidem. It was written by Dr. Brenner who is a retired radiation oncologist It is a very powerful acknowledgment of Dr. Revici's method since it comes from a traditional doctor in the cancer establishment: FOREWORD Dr. Emanuel Revici treats cancer in a manner unlike any other doctor in the United States and probably in the world. He uses his own medicines. Over the years he has developed over 100 different medications in his own laboratory. I don't know how they work, but I have seen their results. I am a retired board certified radiation oncologist. My practice specialized in the treatment of cancer with radiation. I have fought at the front lines in the war against cancer all of my professional life. During my long tenure of battling cancer for my patients, I gradually became rather frustrated and unhappy with the little progress that has been made in the treatment of this disease After more than forty-years of seeing almost no breakthroughs on the medical front, it became painful seeing my patients every day, knowing that most of them had very little chance for a cure. On numerous occasions I saw patients in tears. Just as often I saw wives crying for their husbands, husbands crying for their wives, and parents crying for their sick children. My combined Brooklyn and Queens offices handled several hundred appointments a week during the last ten-years of my practice, making it the largest cancer radiation oncology center in the nation. Highly regarded physicians whose offices were in the shadows of Sloan-Kettering, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons and NYU Medical Center sent their patients to our offices. I was a member of the Cancer and Acute Leukemia Group "B", which is the largest nationally funded cancer research group in the United States. Our office provided this organization with statistical data regarding our patients. My practice produced a personal income for me well into the seven-figure range annually. For four decades our offices were technologically state-of-the-art. We repeatedly spent millions of dollars in order to procure the latest and best radiation and diagnostic equipment available. Despite that outward success, I am still saddened from having watched so many people of all ages die. Even with the best possible equipment and a staff of board-certified radiation oncologists, we could only do so much. Sadly, for the population of patients we saw, the odds were against them. Many came to us hoping to be cured. When I examined their records, though, I knew which ones were being treated for a possible cure, and which ones were being treated for palliation (relief of pain). Since 1950, the medical profession has made only minor advances in the therapeutic arena against cancer. The only significant improvement that I saw was in our diagnostic abilities. As a result, some cancers, such as cancer of the breast, colon, uterus and prostate have cure rates of 90% or better if caught in Stage 1. I must state, however, that these four highly curable cancers become incurable if not caught in their early stages - Stages I or Il. Although the overall numbers say you have a fifty-fifty chance of beating cancer, the individual numbers say you either have a 90% chance or very little chance, depending on what stage the cancer is in and its type. Unfortunately, for a few cancers, such as pancreatic cancer, the patient is lucky to live much more than six months, regardless of the treatment. Even with the all-out effort to catch cancer earlier than ever before, the overall five-year cure rate has inched up a paltry 0.7% in the last 40-years. I first became interested in Emanuel Revici M.D., not from the medical literature, but from hard evidence - that is, X-rays taken at my office of one of my patients. I knew his prior condition, because this was a patient we had seen a year earlier. His cancer of the lung had metastasized to his bones. There was no mistaking the improvement in the patient When I saw that his new films showed no evidence of the cancer either in his bones or lungs, I had to find out what caused the remission. The patient told me he had been undergoing treatment by a Dr. Revici in Manhattan. At the time, I was unfamiliar with the gentleman. Still I arranged to meet with him at his office. When I first met Dr. Revici~ he was already 90-years-old. He showed me enough before and after X-rays and CT scans at our first meeting for me to schedule a second one. A few days later he introduced me to three patients who had previously been stricken with incurable cancer. Two of them had been afflicted with pancreatic cancer and the other was previously diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor. Dr. Revici showed me their CT scans both before and after his treatment. The before' pictures showed a suspicious mass for each patient. He also showed me the written biopsy reports from the various hospitals which had confirmed that the abnormal masses were cancerous. The 'after' scans showed no evidence of any abnormality. From all outward appearances, the three patients looked to be healthy. Dr. Revici also showed me copies of the reports from the patients private physicians who confirmed that the patients were now free of cancer. I knew from my own training and experience that modem medicine couldn't have saved those three people. Each of the three patients had an almost zero percent chance of recovery. That all three would be free of cancer led me to think that Dr. Revici's medicines were worth further investigation. Since those early meetings, I have reviewed the records, X-rays, CT scans and biopsy reports of dozens of Dr. Revici's patients. Often, when Dr. Revici provided me with information on a patient I would attempt to confirm it with the patients previous physicians. I soon found out that every time Dr. Revici had provided me with information regarding a patient It would turn out to be correct. As a Diplomat of Radiology I have reviewed many cases of incurable cancer that Dr. Revici has cured. I must admit that his results aren't always 100% but then neither are the results of the approved medical profession 100%. In my entire career of seeing tens of thousands of patients, I have never seen a single case of spontaneous remission, except for misdiagnosed lung cancer. The cases I reviewed at Dr. Revici's office were not misdiagnosed. In my opinion, its unlikely that the positive outcomes I reviewed were the results of multiple spontaneous remissions. I must interject a brief story at this point. When I met Dr. Revici~ I was sixty-two-years-old. My PSA reading, the screening test for prostate cancer, was 6.2. A PSA score of up to 5.0 is normal. Scores from 5.0 to 10.0, need to be watched, as some may indicate the presence of cancer. Above 10.0, there's a greatly elevated chance of cancer. I told Dr. Revici about my PSA score, so he gave me one of his medications. After taking the medicine for a year, my PSA reading fell to 1.6. There were no apparent ill effects. After a few years of being off the medicine, my latest PSA score has inched up to 2.5. After examining the records of a number of his patients, I am now of the opinion that Dr. Revici has something worthy of a thorough clinical trial. I decided to see if I could help Dr. Revici to conduct a large scale test of his method and his medicines. I made a presentation at the Congressional hearing in March of 1988. At that time I proposed a study to test Dr. Revici's method for treating cancer, Once it is approved, the study will include 100 cases of cancer that the medical profession recognizes as incurable: pancreatic cancer, colon cancer with liver metastases, unresectable lung cancer and unresectable brain cancer. The patients are to be selected by five board-certified oncologists who will verify that each patient is incurable, and that his or her life expectancy is less than one year. Sloan-Kettering, NIH, The Mayo Clinic, M.D. Anderson, John Hopkins and many other outstanding research centers accept cancer patients for experimental trials every day. The patients who volunteer often decide to participate because they believe it might give them a chance they might not have otherwise. I believe its time to conduct an experimental trials of Revici's medicines. These patients would have nothing to lose by their participation. From what I have seen, there is the chance that they would have something to gain. Dr. Revici has cured many people who were otherwise considered incurable. It is my professional opinion that his medicines have worked for many of the patients whose records I have examined. Lets find out if more patients and their families can be helped. The fact that he has helped so many people means its time for Mr. and Mrs. America to push for a clinical trial of his method -Seymour Brenner, M.D., F.A.C.R. |