{"title":"Cancer Therapy: A Review with Scientific Validation for the Role of Electronically Modified Oxygen Derivatives in Oncologic Treatment Modalities","authors":"R. M. Howes","doi":"10.5580/14aa","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The American Cancer Society and the British Columbia Cancer Agency state that electronically modified oxygen derivatives, such as hydrogen peroxide and other \"oxidative therapies,\" are basically ineffective, harmful or even lethal in the treatment of cancer. A compelling body of evidence over the past few decades demands that the therapeutic role of oxygen derivatives be reevaluated. The free radical theory defined oxygen free radicals or reactive oxygen species as being destructive and as the cause of the majority of common human diseases. Yet, decades of experimentation have shown that the free radical theory lacks predictability, fails to meet the requirements of the scientific method and is therefore invalidated. This nullification requires reexamination of oxidative oncologic complementary, alternative and integrative treatment modalities. Prooxidants, some of which are oxygen free radicals or reactive oxygen species, have been blamed for cancer causation and unscrupulous marketers have brought discredit to oxygen based therapies and disregard to oxidative centered treatments. In contrast, a review of currently effective tumoricidal methods reveals a “commonality of oxygen based, anti-neoplastic action,” in that many successful cytotoxic agents, procedures or methods have been shown to proceed primarily via prooxidants. Discussions will compare chemotherapy, radiation therapy, megadose intravenous vitamin C therapy, photodynamic therapy, sonodynamic therapy, the Howes’ singlet oxygen tumoricidal system, ozone therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy and hydrogen peroxide therapy. Various prooxidant delivery systems currently offer beneficial, unique tumoricidal properties and approach the \"Holy Grail\" for cancer treatments, allowing for selective killing of cancer cells while sparing normal cells. This review describes these prooxidant EMOD agents and areas of possible complementarity of oxidative therapies (prooxidant stacking) based on the available scientific literature. Decades of scientific study have shown that prooxidant antineoplastic therapeutic agents provide significant clinical advantage and offer safe, effective and economical promise in the future treatment of cancer.","PeriodicalId":107168,"journal":{"name":"The Internet Journal of Alternative Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Internet Journal of Alternative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5580/14aa","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The American Cancer Society and the British Columbia Cancer Agency state that electronically modified oxygen derivatives, such as hydrogen peroxide and other "oxidative therapies," are basically ineffective, harmful or even lethal in the treatment of cancer. A compelling body of evidence over the past few decades demands that the therapeutic role of oxygen derivatives be reevaluated. The free radical theory defined oxygen free radicals or reactive oxygen species as being destructive and as the cause of the majority of common human diseases. Yet, decades of experimentation have shown that the free radical theory lacks predictability, fails to meet the requirements of the scientific method and is therefore invalidated. This nullification requires reexamination of oxidative oncologic complementary, alternative and integrative treatment modalities. Prooxidants, some of which are oxygen free radicals or reactive oxygen species, have been blamed for cancer causation and unscrupulous marketers have brought discredit to oxygen based therapies and disregard to oxidative centered treatments. In contrast, a review of currently effective tumoricidal methods reveals a “commonality of oxygen based, anti-neoplastic action,” in that many successful cytotoxic agents, procedures or methods have been shown to proceed primarily via prooxidants. Discussions will compare chemotherapy, radiation therapy, megadose intravenous vitamin C therapy, photodynamic therapy, sonodynamic therapy, the Howes’ singlet oxygen tumoricidal system, ozone therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy and hydrogen peroxide therapy. Various prooxidant delivery systems currently offer beneficial, unique tumoricidal properties and approach the "Holy Grail" for cancer treatments, allowing for selective killing of cancer cells while sparing normal cells. This review describes these prooxidant EMOD agents and areas of possible complementarity of oxidative therapies (prooxidant stacking) based on the available scientific literature. Decades of scientific study have shown that prooxidant antineoplastic therapeutic agents provide significant clinical advantage and offer safe, effective and economical promise in the future treatment of cancer.