D3 is more effective as a preventative measure for cancers,
There are over 20 forms of vitamin D including an inactive and active form of vitamin D3. The D3 sold on the market is the inactive D3 since the active form sells for around $600/kg through raw material suppliers. If the kidneys are functioning properly though then they can convert the inactive D3 in to the active form of D3.
As far as cancer therapies I have yet to find any therapy with the effectiveness and safety of ozone therapy.
Most of the therapies flying around really do not have solid evidence behind them so I advise people to do homework on any therapy they choose from non-sales sites. PubMed is a good start.
I have been working on a book reviewing various alternative cancer therapies to show what therapies really work, which are hype, which have a basis for working and evidence and which are simply outright quackery.
When do you think you'll have your book done?
I am not sure. I am typing as fast as I can, but it still takes quite a bit of time to reference it. It will also depend on how far I plan to go with explaining the mechanisms of cancer as well. This is important since in order to understand why a proposed therapy will or will not really work it is important to understand the causes of cancer as well as the various mechanisms involved in its growth, metastases, etc. For example, in order to treat a cold properly it is important to understand that colds are caused from a virus and not an injury. So if cancer is to be addressed the causes must be understood and addressed as well as its mechanisms of growth, spreading, etc. that can be exploited to destroy it, and complications that will have to be addressed. And it will depend on how many therapies I end up covering. Over all I am estimating a couple of months to finish putting it all together if I keep up with the rate I have been going,
with reference to your comment that there are 20 forms of Vitamin D and its active and inactive forms.
These are the forms of Vitamin D that I am aware of and no other...........................
#1. Vitamin D1
A molecular compound of ergocalciferol with lumisterol, 1:1
#2. Vitamin D2 or ergocalciferol (made from ergosterol).
#3. Vitamin D3 or cholecalciferol (made from 7-dehydrocholesterol in the skin).
#4. Vitamin D4 or 22-dihydroergocalciferol
#5. Vitamin D5 sitocalciferol (made from 7-dehydrositosterol)
These are the ones listed by Wikepedia, but there are more. This is why we cannot rely on single sources of information. For example, here is a link about vitamin D6:
I have a list of all the forms of vitamin D somewhere, but not sure where they are off hand. But there are still more forms.
D3 is synonymous with cholcalciferol chemically (Vitamin D Council) whether sourced orally or synthesized thru the skin from sunlight via the Liver into calcidiol, and which in turn is formed into calcitriol in the kidneys.
I'd be interested to know the sources of your information for these 20 forms of Vitamin D and the distinction between the active and inactive forms of cholcalciferol.
There is an inactive form of D3 (cholecalciferol) and an active form of D3 (calcitriol). Here are more sources of information:
"Calcitriol (i.e., active vitamin D3) is the metabolite of cholecalciferol (i.e., inactive vitamin D3)."
"In the first step of vitamin D3 biosynthesis, skin exposure to sunlight (UV-B radiation) induces the conversion of 7-dehydrocholesterol to previtamin D3, which is followed by the rapid and spontaneous isomerisation of previtamin D3 to vitamin D3. The biologically inactive vitamin D3 is then converted to 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (25(OH)D3) in the liver, and a second hydroxylation in kidneys converts 25(OH)D3 to the biologically active metabolite 1,25(OH)2D3."
One of the books I have been writing is on is on osteroporosis, osteomalacia and osteoarthritis. So the differences in vitamin D is one of the topics I cover on bone health.
Ozone therapy may be an effective treatment against malignant cancers, but I always thought that it would be more effective to use several therapies in unison, rather than just Ozone in isolation.
Yes and no. Ozone is the safest and most effective cancer therapy there is. But I often recommend people also utilize certain herbs and a better diet. Rife units sometimes as well, although set at a frequency of 666hz. If there is an advanced, aggressive cancer though ozone should definitley be the primary focus.
On the other hand it is important not to do use ozone at the same exact time as herbal therapies as the herbs can be oxidized by the ozone.
The other, and more important, thing to keep in mind is that there are a lot of bogus and unproven cancer therapies being promoted out there. This is why I decided to write a book on alternative cancer therapies as well. When I do recommend other cancer therapies I do so based on what has some evidence behind it rather than unsubstantiated claims, which is what drives most alternative therapies, and it either must not conflict with what else is being used or at least be able to be used in conjunction by using them at different times of day such as herbs and ozone.
very interesting re D6 and D7.
I was aware of the synthesis of Cholcalciferol into calcidiol and then in turn into calcitriol but the terms active and inactive would refer to its utilization by the body but I have not really pondered that way of looking at it.
They are chemically different forms of vitamin D3 though. The form of vitamin D found in plants and used in milk is inactive D2 (ergocalciferol). D2 can also be produced by the body from a plant sterol. Inactive D3 can be formed by the conversion of D2 in to D3 or by the action of sunlight on 7-dehydrocholesterol in the skin. This leads to the production of a weak form of D3 (cholecalciferol), which is then converted in to another form of D3 (calcidiol) that is still considered inactive due to its weak effects. Calcidiol then can be converted in to its active form, calcitriol, by the kidneys if functioning properly.
I would beg to differ on Ozone being the safest and most effective cancer therapy
Let's see. Ozone destroys cancer cells through a variety of mechanisms, it also addresses the base causes of cancer, caner cells are unable to build up a tolerance to ozone, and cancer cells are killed on contact in a chain reaction. Furthermore, a study did in Germany followed over 6.5 million injections with ozone and there were just over 30 adverse events recorded, mostly irritation near the injection site. Again, I have yet to find any therapy with the effectiveness or safety of ozone therapy.
and where in my experience and research the Budwig protocol would be equally as effective.
I have not looked much in to Budwig. From what I have seen on it so far I would not rely on it alone, and especially for an advanced cancer.
As you mention, lifestyle and dietary changes are paramount, but the Gerson &Oleander approaches are also vitally important.
We will definitely have to disagree on the oleander therapy. I have addressed this a number of times. The only study on effectiveness that can be found showed it to be ineffective for cancer. The current phase 1 trials for safety were being touted recently as if they showed oleander was effective, but this was not the case. I discussed this in this post:
And when asked repeatedly for some of the studies claimed to exist proving oleander worked I was ignored repeatedly. This tells me that the studies never really existed in the first place.
This is the exact reason I started the book on alternative cancer therapies. There are too many unproven, and sometimes very dangerous, cancer treatments being touted all over the internet. And much of this based on misconceptions like a lack of oxygen or acids cause cancer. So I am doing a review of various cancer therapy claims as well as treatments and discussing the evidence, or lack thereof, of these treatments. And I plan to rate them based on safety and proven effectiveness, not misguided concepts or unsubstantiated testimonials.
I also believe that a comprehensive treatment plan would be more effective as long as they are compatible and work in unison as you have also mentioned.
I expect you will list these bogus and unproven cancer therapies in your book, but perhaps you would be good enough to provide a tidbit of info as to what some of them are.?
Sure, for the ones proven to work I plan to include ozone, hyperthermia and other forms of radiofrequency therapy, betulinic acid, various herbs, etc. As for the ones that lack evidence and/or do not have good safety records I intend to include oleander, cesium chloride, IV ascorbic acid, baking soda, etc.
I have been making a list of others that I may cover as well such as laetrile, mushrooms, Hoxsey, DMSO/MSM, colloidal silver, IP6, germanium, Essiac, DCA, alkaline waters, etc. And I may cover some that may or may not really be considered as "alternatives" such as HCG vaccines, photodynamic therapy, hydrazine sulfate, etc.
There are so many claimed cancer treatments out there that it is impossible to cover them all. So I will have to focus on the ones that I have found evidence to that they work and the ones being touted most frequently as effective when there is no evidence to back the claims. I can post a full list of which ones I cover in the book when it is finished. So far I have the ones on IV vitamin C, and cesium chloride finished and am working on the chapters on baking soda and the cancer is Candida myth, as well as a chapter on the acid-alkaline myths and how they apply to touted cancer therapies.
Keep in mind that cancer is a very serious condition and can be deadly. This is why people need to do their homework and not rely on unsubstantiated claims or testimonials as proof of anything. There are claims being made that parasites cause all cancers. And others claiming that it is fungus, or that it is always caused by nutritional deficiencies, or acids, etc. Of course how can these claims be correct when they all claim to be the sole cause? Yet people blindly follow these claims all the time just like how they blindly follow claims of cures with no evidence. Then when the cancer continues to grow or the person dies alternative medicines get blamed in general and more restrictions get applied. So if people really want to make claims about cancer causes or treatments then they should be willing to present some real evidence or actual scientific rationale behind the claims, not just what some website or book claims or unsubstantiated claims of cures.