I've posted this before, but I added an update based on a UCSF study that tracked growing usage of such "medicines." I also added a note explaining why mouse and lab studies should not be used as evidence.
pcnrv.blogspot.com/2018/07/...
I should also add this article about CVS doing lab testing on all their supplements. You never know what is really in the bottle:
Thank you for sharing the info!!
"You never know what is really in the bottle"
A lot of people can't seem to understand that.
Does anyone know anyone else that does this kind of testing.
It appears with the Valsartan recalls, you can't even trust that prescription drugs are properly tested.
I use consumerlab.com when I consider any supplement or nutritional item. They are an independent testing lab and check for toxins, product had the amount it says on the label and sources info on possible health benefits of use. It is a membership site so dues help pay for the work.
Certainly not when they come from China, as was the case in the Valsartan recalls.
Almost all of our drugs and supplements are manufactured in India or China.
Almost everything comes from China. Except maybe ayurvedic medicine. And India is not much better.
The Chinese don't even trust Chinese sourced food or medicine. They will invariably pay a high premium for something they know is not produced in China.
And the FDA just sits on the sidelines and lets all this garbage be imported from China. Shame Shame Shame on them.
You say,
“82% survived for 5 years vs 87% among non-users, and were 2.1 times more likely to die after adjustment.”
I don’t get the math. If 82% survived that means 18% died. And if 87% survived that means 13% died. That adds up to 38% more likely to die by my math (18 is 138% of 13. What am I I missing.
Schwah
"and were 2.1 times more likely to die after adjustment." You're missing the adjustment for things like age, clinical group stage, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score (CDCS), insurance type, race/ethnicity, year of diagnosis, and cancer type using the propensity score matching technique. Propensity score matching attempts to compare apples to apples.
Gotcha. So the 2.1 number is supposed to be a better reflection of the actual odds. Now that makes sense.
Perhaps CBD, intravenous vitamin c, ozone therapy and other types are starting to slice into the financial pie of the uro's and onco's so let's publish a "study" that supports how alternative / non conventional practices do not work and in the long run, you are twice as likely to die because you chose to evade the "system". Let's scare them into radiation or surgery so they don't have any time to think, because if they do, they could go the alternative route and we could lose all that revenue. Oh My! That would be a pity.
👏
1. Which of the following is more likely to be true:
a. CBD, intravenous vitamin c, ozone therapy and other types are starting to slice into the financial pie of the uro's and onco's so they publish a "study" that supports how alternative / non conventional practices do not work and in the long run, you are twice as likely to die because you chose to evade the "system".
b. CBD, intravenous vitamin c, ozone therapy don't have supporting studies because they are not treatments that work.
2. Which if the following is more likely to be true:
a. Radiation and surgery are scientifically proven treatments and that's why patients are willing to try them and to pay for them.
b. Patients are scared into radiation or surgery so they don't have any time to think, because if they do, they could go the alternative route and we (insert bad company here) could lose all that revenue.
I always want to know who paid for the study? Following the money says a lot about the motivations behind the results no matter what side of an argument the report is supporting.
There are some companies which test supplements. Some sell their own line, so you already know the results of the tests, but others will test almost anything, for a fee.
google.com/search?q=supplem...
I used many kinds of alternative treatments from 2001 to 2015 and slowed the growth of my cancer, but in the end, had to have surgery because the cancer closed off the urethra and I couldn't pee. Some people have had good results with alternative treatments, but you need to set reasonable expectations going in, and know when to escalate to another modality. Everything in the bag of treatments is a tool, use it until it no longer works, and move on.
I used to think we just dumped most supplements in our urine. But it turns out they can be harmful and do damage. Their only benefit may be physiological. I don’t think there are any credible double blind tests regarding their results. Everything in moderation.
garyi- the reason there are no credible double blind studies with supplements is because you can't patent a natural. No patent, no money.
In fact, there have been several randomized double blind studies - most proving no effect. Supplements is a multi-billion dollar industry. Studies have been funded by manufacturers, for example, Pom Wonderful funded the clinical trials that eventually proved that pomegranate juice had no effect on prostate cancer. ECGC failed to show a benefit. Sulforaphane, so far in a small trial, seems to be beneficial. NIH funded the SELECT trial on Vitamin E and selenium that proved that supplementing Vitamin E caused prostate cancer, and alerted us to the harm of taking excess anti-oxidants.
I have mentioned this many times before because of my frustration, I have tried a LOT of supplements since I got sick and NONE of them were successful in slowing or lowering my rising PSA. while doing them, I wanted them to work so bad but unfortunately they did not give me any results
"Never underestimate the power of a placebo."
TA- once the cancer has metastasized, the industry will tell you they have no cure, they can only slow it down, sometimes with dire side effects. So I don't mind trying solutions outside of the box. They may help or not, but at least I am giving it an additional try.
But you are correct re: supplements that may not be accurately sold. If a person goes with a large company, that has been in the business a long time, and can share their quality control, I think is a good choice.
After all I read that at about 40% of drugs come from naturals. If they don't mind, neither do I. "Today, about 40 percent of our prescription medicines come from plant extracts or synthesized plant compounds. plant-based medicines are everywhere, including the shelves of our local drugstores. quinidine are both extracts from cinchona bark. Both are still used against malaria parasites."
With reluctance I will jump in here.
Tall Allen is correct about the established benefits of supplements; i.e., to the best of my knowledge they have yet to be shown to be beneficial when it comes to controlling PCa.
What has not been mentioned in this thread is that one factor, which has been shown to enhance the effectiveness of placebos, is their costs. It turns out that placebo work better, if they cost more. With that in mind I encourage those, who feel strongly that supplements are benefiting them, to buy the most expensive ones that they can afford.
In a similar vein, when folks endorse here some complimentary or alternative therapy, could they please tell us how much they are spending on whatever agent they feel is beneficial?
Thank you.
It works exactly the same way with solid silver 10 gauge speaker cable for your awesome Hi-Fi. The more they cost, the better they “sound.”
Pay for quality is true.
$150 for IV vit-C once every few months $500 per month on nutrients ..
I think you are right that the placebo effect is an important reason for taking supplements. I also appreciate that it feels better to be doing something than nothing.
A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.
Well I guess that the dandelion tea, honey and CBD oil just make me feel like I’m doing something right. 😜😜😜
Kind of surprised at the lack of results for supplemental calcium and vitamin D in prostate cancer. The urologist recommended them right after giving me an Eligard shot.
Perhaps your levels were low?
My psa is rising while my vitamin D level is 98.6 and has been high like that but That is one thing I can test and see results. I have been taking it for a while and my lab work reflects that but is it helping my psa? The answer is NO
My urologist, my radiologist and my medical oncologist ALL recommended the calcium and vitamin D supplement after I started ADT. Yesterday Zero had a webathon on the side effects of ADT and the MD presenting made the exact same recommendation.
Branding all supplements as bogus, or as in the case of that article making a claim that a calcium/vitamin D supplement is harmful, while not referring to any study supporting it is simply bad reporting.
In this case (and metformin) I'll continue believing the trained physicians who are being paid to treat me rather than Time Magazine.
My articles always have links to published peer-reviewed articles. It is a good idea to show your doctors those studies, and ask for their impressions.
Indeed you may, but the Time magazine article you referred us to makes the assertion that supplemental calcium and vitamin D are harmful, using as a reference a study that said:
"In fact, some supplements even appeared to come with health risks. People who took high doses of calcium via supplement had a 53% higher risk of dying from cancer than people who were not taking supplements, the study says. But excess calcium from food was not associated with a similar uptick in mortality risk, Zhang says, which suggests that the body may not be able to clear excess supplemental calcium as well as it can natural calcium. The connection between excess calcium and cancer still isn’t totally clear and will require more research, she says.
People who took vitamin D supplements but were not deficient in vitamin D also had a higher risk of dying during the study period, the researchers found, but the supplements did not seem to boost death risk for those who were lacking in vitamin D. Some studies have shown that vitamin D supplements may reduce risk of death and disease, while some have not."
I find the statement "People who took high doses of calcium via supplement had a 53% higher risk of dying from cancer than people who were not taking supplements, the study says" particularly interesting.
Perhaps the 53% higher risk of dying from cancer might be because these people already have a cancer that required ADT to treat it - and they tried to prevent bone loss and fractures by taking the calcium supplement.
It then waffles on with the statement "The connection between excess calcium and cancer still isn’t totally clear and will require more research, she says." - which to me means this is just BS we're spinning here because we might get some attention due to it.
A well written article with real studies using real data to back up the article is great - this one IMHO is pretty much worthless when the study the article is based on appears to questionable.
I added the Time article for the news about independent testing of supplements sold at CVS.
If you want to see some research published in peer-reviewed journals about the danger of calcium supplementation, there are these:
"Our findings suggest that calcium intakes exceeding 1,500 mg/d may be associated with a decrease in differentiation in prostate cancer and ultimately with a higher risk of advanced and fatal prostate cancer..."
cebp.aacrjournals.org/conte...
"Among both Blacks and Whites, we observed a threshold for calcium intake (604 mg/day) below which prostate cancer risk declined sharply. "
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl...
" high calcium intake exhibited a close correspondence for high-grade cancer, advanced and fatal prostate cancer."
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl...
Now, these were all observational studies that did not rise to the level of evidence of the several Level 1 Vitamin D studies, but I think that if there is any indication of risk at all with no clear indication of benefit, patients are well-advised to stay away from it. Only those with low serum levels should supplement calcium.
Sorry, I do not see the added note about mouse and lab evidence?
at the bottom
The campaign against supplements and complementary therapies is exhausting.
It's not right to try to deter people from doing their own reading and trying to scare them with headlines implying adding any and all supplements or any and all complementary therapies will decrease survivability.
This sentence alone makes this article of limited usefulness:
"Complementary and alternative medicines consisted of herbs and botanicals, vitamins and minerals, probiotics, Ayurvedic medicine, traditional Chinese medicine, homeopathy and naturopathy, deep breathing, yoga, Tai Chi, Qi Gong, acupuncture, chiropractic or osteopathic manipulation, MEDITATION, MASSAGE, PRAYER, special diets, PROGRESSIVE RELAXATION, and/or GUIDED IMAGERY."
What are the numbers for each particular "medicine" if massage and prayer were counted as "complementary and alternative medicine?"
My husband's doctors have not discouraged him from taking IP6, Modified Citrus Pectin, Vitamin D3, K2, berberine, or any of the others we've told them he is using.
Yes, of course there is "danger" in choosing prayer and/or massage to cure cancer, but I doubt ADDING prayer and massage to traditional therapies is "dangerous." Wouldn't the apparent criteria used to define "medicine" skew the results and make them suspect?
I have personally never seen anyone post on this site the suggestion that conventional therapies should be discontinued in favor of alternative therapies.
I hope the posters here who regularly share new research and information about the use of alternative therapies and addition of supplements and off label use of conventional "medicines" will continue despite the constant push back.
I think their point is that people who use complementary medicine tend to not use the full range of therapies that have actual evidence behind them, and their lives are shorter because of that.
Ask yourself some questions:
• Do I know what is actually in the bottle?
• Do I know that it is safe in the quantities I use?
• Do I know how it interacts with other drugs I am taking?
• Do I know what effect it has on the Cytochrome P450 enzymes that I rely on to make other drugs work and prevent excess effect from other drugs?
• Do I know what effect it has on my microbiome?
• Do I know what effect it has on my immune system?
• Does it interfere with assays of important diagnostics?
Unfortunately, I have seen posts by people on this site who have eschewed conventional therapies in favor of alternative therapies.
Posts on this site about supplements tend to lack balance and perspective. Those that post lab/mouse studies as "evidence" do members a disservice, as do those who post testimonials from supplement sellers and cite "evidence" that does not come from a peer-reviewed journal. Being human, we are all subject to confirmation bias. If I provide scientific evidence against what you "know" to be true, perhaps that is something you need to heed.
I think many supplements of all stripes can sometimes cause a statistical bump in PC progression and PSA levels. I do think some supplements might assist the body in clearing out PSA resulting in an "improved" PSA test result. This "improved" PSA result might fool the doctor into prescribing the wrong next course of action. Cannabis on the other hand has been shown to improve things - in certain cases - far more than just a statistical bump. What works for one person will not work for other people. All cancers are different. Cancer is an elusive boogie man. As far as cannabis goes, next month I will know.
When I was in the hospital after my prostatectomy they gave me vitamins two or three times a day to help my recovery from surgery.
When I went home they did not give me some tablets or a prescription so I bought some of my own.
I recovered very quickly from the surgery and I think it helped the first two weeks when I was ill, constipated and not eating properly.
My thinking was that my body had a massive job getting rid of all the damaged tissue and building new stuff so keeping it topped up with everything it could need was a good idea.
I lost a couple of kilos in those two weeks so a lot of work was being done and I was not eating enough to stand still in nutritional terms.
Thanks for your post. I know of somebody's young daughter fighting very aggressive breast cancer because of relying on supplemental treatment for sometime. Some of us feel very strongly about supplemental treatments and will react very strongly about that. I am fighting metastatic prostate cancer and I rely totally on standard treatments.
Recently, I read a post on social media about a researcher in USA who claims fasting will kill cancer cells dead!
Do Vitamins nourish cancer?
I had a friend who died using these alternatives to treatment so this is serious for me. I think those who promote alternatives to treatment need to stay within the existing scientific evidence and refrain from these conspiratorial BS arguments like "Big Pharma" or some other boogeyman is suppressing all of the evidence because it cuts into their profit, etc. This kind of argument sounds like the UFO people arguing that the lack of physical evidence for extraterrestial visits is some kind of coordinated world-wide government coverup. Or the "free energy" folks claiming "big oil" companies have bought up all the free energy machine patents and destroyed them.
Another BS argument is that none of these "conventional treatments" actually cure anything plus they have such terrible side effects, therefore they are no good. Instead, we should only use things that sound good and are supposedly good for our body even if they mean we die sooner?
There's andectdotal evidence to support some of these alternatives, but people like my friend aren't included in the cherry-picked statistics.
Steve Jobs died of pancreatic cancer using "alternative therapies"?! A man with all the funds necessary to do it right but listened to the quacks. Soooo sad.
Being in "The Golden Zone" (ie watchful waiting), one has the time to experiment with different things but when you have a Gleason 8 score play it by the standardized procedure to maximize lifespan.
My personal take.
Good points. People who have less serious disease have more freedom to experiment with things that may or may not work. When I was diagnosed at stage 4, my body was wracked with pain and I knew I was dying. I thought to myself, whatever this is, it's killing me. I knew that if I screwed around with unproven treatments I wouldn't last long.
The problem I see is that there is this seduction going on. It's easy to find fault with conventional treatments that are basically chemicals, poisons, radiation or nuclear waste. Wouldn't you rather put the vital nutrients into your body so that it can be strong enough to fight off the cancer without all of those nasty things? That's probably why you got cancer in first place. It just all sounds so good, it's very seductive. I think that's what sucked in people like my friend, Steve Jobs, and many others. What I found amazing, was that my friend clung to this, even as he was getting worse and worse, refusing to see the truth while those around him tried to change his mind. Very sad.
Good post Gregg57, I felt the same when I was diagnosed, extreme pain tends to get your attention quickly, you don't screw around because you know it's a make or break moment with your life.
I asked my Doctor if a special more healthy diet would help, he just said eat what you want/like. I took it as, you're screwed and just enjoy everything you can.
I read a sad story on FB about a Father that was Diagnosed stage 3 and decided not to have any conventional treatment, just changed to some wacky diet, the daughter said it's spread everywhere in 2 years (Liver, Lungs and Brain), she sounded devastated at the news.
Thanks.
This sad story happens more often than we hear.
I feel a rant coming on.
The alternatives-to-treatment people only talk about success stories. I get a kick out these dietology cult-like attitudes, almost condescending if you have cancer. They love to lecture the "failures" Like, ewww, cancer, what did you do wrong? "I don't have cancer because I eat all of the right things and supplements etc." After I told one of my "friends" about my prostate cancer, he exclaimed "Well, I plan on living a long time!" He is also one of the healthier-than-thou types. As a side note, he just recently told me he has prostate cancer.
I do believe there are a lot of people out there that think if you have cancer, you really screwed up. You obviously don't eat the right foods and take the right supplements. And of course it's easy to get on your high horse when you are healthy (just damn lucky and that's it). But in a world of anecdotal evidence, and cherry-picked sample sizes of one, I can prove my superior "program" prevents cancer simply because I don't have it. Correlation IS causation. It's funny because everyone is so convinced of their very particular regimen and they are all different.
I got to sit through an hour long diet and supplement lecture from a guy that had Gleason 6 cancer. He had reduced his already low PSA to something slightly lower, therefore his "program" was proven. Apparently it stopped working and he is now on conventional treatments. Doesn't come to group any more, I just heard about through someone else.
Your doctor gave you good advice about your diet, not because you are screwed, but because it's not going to make a difference. And why sacrifice your quality of life for some snake-oil unproven BS?
End of rant.
I've never been a health freak but I do eat balanced meals and don't eat fast food. I think you cannot escape it anyway fruits and veg are sprayed with pesticides, meat is pumped full of hormones and fish is living in waters we contaminated. Anything we do diet wise, is like pouring a cup of water onto a house fire.
I'm eating a little less meat and more salads and making my own juices (because supermarket ones are full of sugars), it's not much because I felt I never had a poor diet in the first place.
I take double daily dose of Vit D and that's it really. I found a source of CBD in this country and ordered some at the weekend, even after Chemo I'm still struggling with pain, I hope this will help reduce the need for 3000 Para/Codiene and 200 Tramadol everyday, that amount of pain meds cannot be good for my body in the long term.
I was joking about the screwed part lol
"But what about Jobs' use of alternative medicine? Could that have had an impact on his cancer?
Some experts say that, if anything, use of alternative medicine approaches may have helped Jobs' overall health. Jobs lived 8 years after his diagnosis.
The average life expectancy for someone with a metastatic neuroendocrine tumor is about two years, according to PCAN. (It remains unclear whether Jobs' cancer was metastatic when he was diagnosed.)
"I believe that he must have really refocused his health practices," through changes in diet and exercise, said Dr. Ashwin Mehta, an assistant professor and medical director of integrative medicine at the University of Miami's Sylvester Cancer Center. "To do as well as he did, he must have done a lot of things right," Mehta said."
livescience.com/16551-steve...
Paul Allen was probably wealthier that Jobs and he died last fall of a lymphoma after fighting it for 9 years. I am unaware that he deviated from standard of care treatments like Jobs, he certainly would have had access to the best of the best for medical care. Then again he was treated for Hodgkins lymphoma back in the late 80s and survived 20 more years.
I am not sure why you chose to post this rant against supplements now. We all know your position on supplements. But I will play along.
I would not take any supplement on the bases of tests on lab animals. When a supplement shows promise on humans then I will take notice. I have been taking supplements for 27 years, and believe they have slowed the progress of my cancer. Just as I believe becoming a vegetarian has slowed the progress of my cancer. If the US government can get behind some alterative therapies (National Center of Complementary and integrative Health) why can't you.
I have been told by doctors that some vitamins and supplements might have a beneficial effect on my cancer. And since you are not a doctor I think I would error on the side of my doctors.
I posted it because I updated it with new info about the rising use of supplements by men with prostate cancer. Your beliefs and opinions of doctors are an inferior level of evidence compared to what is presented in the article. The data they present are not matters of opinion, they are facts. No one can refute beliefs, but beware of confirmation bias.
The articles you site are indeed interesting. My question as always is, who paid for the study, big pharma? I always question the source of funding with any study. Calling my doctors inferior to your studies is rather insulting and uncalled for. I thought you of all people on this website would not go that low. It only increases my suspicion that you have ulterior motives.
Please read the note at the end about levels of evidence. "Inferior" and "superior" evidence is determined by medical science consensus, and has nothing to do with opinion or feelings. If you follow the link to the Oxford site, you will see that doctor opinions are level 5 - the lowest level of evidence.
If you look at the published studies, they all contain an explanation of potential conflicts and who paid for the study.
The study seems to match patients who took "alternative" treatments. I am not an advocate for replacing standard treatments with supplements. I am a advocate for taking supplements in conjunction WITH standard treatments. I would never tell anyone to take supplements instead of standard medicine.
There were two studies reviewed in the article. One was about alternative medicines. The other one was about complementary medicines.
My bottom line is that I would not place my confidence in a crony government agency like the FDA or their counterparts big pharma whose only driving force is profit.
I empathize with your desire to believe that your current efforts are slowing the progression of your cancer but you are an N of 1. Pretty hard to disprove OR prove results in such a case since I imagine you don't wish to discontinue your regimen to see if your progress reverses...... and, yes, I have noticed that there ARE a lot of folks wedded to " standard of care " here such that those who are inclined to introduce alternatives might be disinclined rather than answer the many posts with objections.... Still... like it or not... the current standard of care continues to exist, likely, because it is first 1. The standard of care : ) and 2. because it has shown itself more effective than the alternatives to date....... one hopes that those who are treating us keep their minds open, however, to new information as it accrues... or acting creatively for those of us who would like to alter the hard and fast standards.
With ~1/4 million new cases of PC a year, we simply are not serious about conquering this killer. The Da Vinci machines are the 9th wonder of the world. Ottmar Merganthaler's Linotype was the 8th.
Random thoughts.
These results are not surprising..BUT... it is understandable ( particularly with Pca) why men would seek to find an alternative to the major life altering treatments available for the disease. I would bet that _should_ a treatment become commonplace that does not rob men of their ability to have erections, destroy muscle mass, raise cholesterol etc...etc ...etc... We will see a substantial decrease in those seeking tx via complementary/alternative methods in favor of medically accepted methods... Until that time I imagine a lot of men will delay treatment or seek alternatives.... I am currently working to convince an acquaintance that he ought to REALLY consider ADT over his current regimen of Laetrile / Hyperbaric Oxygen and IV Vitamins and minerals ( At least he did relent initially and paid out of pocket to have HIFU ( which left him uncured)... He's playing with fire and this is one guy who is likely to get burned even though his limited pelvic mets are stable for now.
There were two studies reviewed in the article. One was about alternative medicines. The other one was about complementary medicines.
Cannabis might be complementary, tumeric too but watch out tumeric can skew PSA readings lower.
Reading the posts above about the person with metastatic cancer dying because they used supplements and Steve Jobs dying because they used supplements like there would have been a different outcome if they didn't makes no sense. Guess what--a ton of guys are dying after being treated with conventional medicine, too. The reality is that doctors cannot cure stage 4 cancer even with their arsenal of big pharm products. Some cancers are deadly no matter what you do and some aren't (also no matter what you do, i.e, overtreatment). But TA does have a gift for clickbait to his blog and getting everyone riled up, so I'll give him that.
HERE WE GO AGAIN....
Chocolate chip ice cream (two scoops)
Good Luck, Good Health and Good Humor.
j-o-h-n Friday 05/17/2019 7:08 PM DST
Lately, I've been trying to cure my cancer with ice cream along with ADT and Zytiga. Looks like the ice cream is working!!!
Good News.... Remember two scoops (three if the wife isn't looking).
Good Luck, Good Health and Good Humor.
j-o-h-n Friday 05/17/2019 7:59 PM DST
Do your wings bother you when you lie down or can you fold them.
Good Luck, Good Health and Good Humor.
j-o-h-n Friday 05/17/2019 8:01 PM DST
Thank you Allen. forewarned is forearmed
As I said here many times before, I do think that when it comes to a serious illness such as advances prostate cancer is, an illness which cannot be cured but where life can be prolonged, we have to go for conventional treatments, treatments from modern medicine, to help slow down progression but also supplements/alternatives to strengthen the whole system while undergoing conventional treatment (and some of those supplements may even have effects on cancer cells we don't even know of). So I would always definitely go with the medical treatments being offered but never exclude supplements from my life. I don't think that the reason that there are not as many studies on supplements as there are on medicine is because of the pharma industry and because, ultimately, it all comes down to money. Fact is that many supplements don't do any harm; so try them, see if they help, if they don't help, they won't make you worse, and if they do help, you can be very happy to have found another way of treating your cancer. I would always go for both.
In the first study, why were there so few patients (258) in the CM group, compared to the control group (1.9 million)?
-Sunlight
"258 patients who chose a complementary therapy were matched to 1032 patients who did not use any complementary medicine "
OK, but the spirit of my question still stands: how does having 3 times the number of patients in the solely allopathic group as in the CM group improve the accuracy of the study?
Because they used a technique called "propensity score matching" so that they compare apples to apples. Keep in mind that this was a retrospective analysis of patient data, and not a prospective clinical trial (which would be ideal). To avoid the selection bias inherent in such retrospective studies as much as possible, they used a statistical technique. Each person in the treatment group is matched on known risk characteristics to as many people as they can find in the "control" group. The more matched patients they can find, the more reliable the comparison. The more risk characteristics they use, the better the comparison, but the harder it is to find exact matches (so this technique gobbles up sample size - that's why they started with 1.9 million patients and whittled it down to only 1,032 who "matched" exactly). This technique works well when they captured the most important risk characteristics, and there is significant overlap on them in both groups.
TA, I appreciate your adherence to scientific principles, large sample sizes and what they show. I am exhausted with research. 66 yrs old, recurrent PCa, PSA=2.0, Axumin scan misidentified a pocket of urine in my bladder as a potential tumor, to which my sister asked the poignant question, "A $35K scan can't tell the difference between urine and cancer?" So, 6 month doubling rate, doc says I'm healthy and he understands my reluctance to cut off my testosterone, but it appears that this will happen soon enough. Not on any meds, still running/exercising/having sex (injections), very contented. Stopped worrying about it at PSA=1.8 (3 mos ago); enjoyed my life not thinking about it. Have sort of surrendered to the idea that allopathic docs are doing the best they can and are offering the most effective protocol. Would like to read a summation of your current thoughts on treatments/methods for recurrent Pca given your own personal research. I no longer feel that I can control my cancer with diet. Some have done it, but just like the research coming out now that everyone's gut biome is different and having different effects on the same disease, I'm more inclined to trust my doc than those with a book to sell.
When to begin ADT after recurrence after salvage options are exhausted is controversial. The TOAD RCT suggested a benefit in beginning sooner and found no QOL benefit to delay - so far. But with only 5 years of follow-up and a small sample size, it is not definitive. It does raise some interesting perspectives though - especially that reducing the cancer load with systemic treatment delays progression more than the selective pressure on ADT-resistant clones increases progression. In fact, those who delayed ADT became castration resistant sooner than those who started ADT at the first sign of recurrence.
thelancet.com/journals/lano...
Cannabinoid products are becoming popular as a therapeutic cancer fighting medicine. Not nearly enough study has been conducted to support any claims that they do, however. But there are some indications that there could be some value to their use in conjunction with accepted treatments. Rick Simpson Oil (RSO) may be the most important of the bunch because it contains very highly concentrated THC levels (the total opposite of CBD oil which contains virtually no THC) and must be used with caution. I used RSO for a couple months and believe it may have stalled my rising PSA but don't know for sure and certainly I am not recommending that anyone start an RSO regimen. I have read that using these products could set up cancer cells to be very receptive to radiation. I have used CBD for almost 2 years and plan to use RSO again during and after SBRT Cyberknife treatment if I am accepted as a patient (will know tomorrow). One thing about RSO is that it is a pain reliever, can elevate mood, and puts me in a deep nightlong sleep with no snoring.
Alternative treatments 
New Study Results Dangerously Being Oversimplified
Metformin - an alternative view.
Provenge Alternatives?
A Complementary Therapy that might actually help?
