[Fwd: Dr Nugent-Ambrotose/Cancer]

[Guest guest]

Once again I'm forwarding Dr. Steve Nugent's article on the power of

ambrotose to fight all kinds of cancer. I'd be happy to help anyone who

needs more info.

MANNATECH PRODUCTS, INCLUDING AMBROTOSE (WHICH IS IN ALL OF THE PRODUCTS

IN VARYING PROPORTIONS) WILL BE AVAILABLE LEGALLY IN THE U.K. ON

NOVEMBER 15 OR THEREABOUTS -- THAT'S THE DATE IT'S TARGETED FOR!

Sandy

litedir@...

THE NUGENT REPORTS

Complementary Cancer Therapies (Sugars That Heal - Part 1)

by Dr. Steve Nugent

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is the first in a series of articles on natural substances that

could be effective complementary therapies for cancer.

It is a real tragedy that the orthodox medical community has been taught

(incorrectly) by medical schools that drugs and surgery are the only

options for cancer. This means that tens of thousands of cancer victims

are missing the possible opportunity to use safe nontoxic natural

methods that could mean the difference between life and death for many.

In my opinion, medical doctors are correctly taught to be cautious and

conservative, but this should not be extended to include closed

mindedness. Patient welfare must always come first without question, both

orthodox and alternative practitioners must agree on that point.

Medical schools do not teach doctors about the latest in so-called

alternative methods, but a new American Medical Association directive has

instructed allopathic doctors (medical doctors) to start learning this

area of medicine. That's terrific news!

I say " so-called " alternative methods because that's the popular term,

but one for which I have great disdain. I use it only because so many

people are familiar with it. I prefer to use the term " complementary

medicine. " Not just because I am the founder of the International

Association of Complementary Medicine (IACM), but because I feel that

natural and orthodox medical practitioners can best serve the public by

working together, sharing research and therapies. This gives the patient

the best and most complete treatments for whatever their needs are.

As I have stated in my first physicians desk reference (Nugent's

Physicians Desk Reference for Applied Clinical Nutrition), " I believe

there is an answer for all disease that can be found in nature. It is our

mission therefore to work tirelessly until we find all of those answers. "

For now, however, many answers must still be found through synthetics or

surgeries. Eventually with the unprecedented speed at which research is

progressing in the areas of phytonutrients and glyconutrients, drugs will

be replaced and all doctors who wish to stay in practice will have to

learn these new areas of science and patient care. In the meantime

however, we need to work together.

More than 45% of the U.S. population uses vitamins now. According to the

National Cancer Institute, more than 35% of doctors who treat cancer are

using some type of alternative therapy as an adjunct to chemotherapy or

radiation.

Scientific, peer-reviewed studies proving the safety and efficacy of

natural substances for many areas including cancer have been available

for more than 26 years! No medical schools teach that information. Almost

no doctors know about the information. This is appalling in the age of

communication!

Keep in mind my friends: the second largest moneymaking industry in the

world is the cancer industry. That's right, second only to the Oil

industry. Cancer is the most serious problem on this planet today! Why

isn't the word getting out? Could this be due to scientific myopia? Are

the professors and researchers simply unwilling to consider new ideas? Is

there a conspiracy to insure that the cancer industry continues to grow

and profit? Well, I don't have the answers to these questions and I

choose not to speculate on them.

I do know that to be admitted to medical school you have to be an

exceptional person, and to survive the grueling class work, internship

and residency you have to be even more exceptional. Medical doctors are

without question special people. Are some motivated only by money? Well,

despite popular myth, they are human and they do have human emotions.

Some are without question motivated by greed, but I would point out that

there are easier, more lucrative career paths than medicine. With this in

mind, I believe most are dedicated, caring people who truly want their

patients to be well. Indeed, as I have been lecturing around North

America and Europe for the last 15 years, my experience has been that

most are caring, good people.

I recently lectured at the University of Texas Medical School and was not

only well received, I had dozens of these Md.'s asking me if I could

please teach them what I know. Just as a side note here, my school has

been delayed but will be underway this year. I have found medical doctors

and osteopaths in western Canada to be particularly interested. This has

not always been the case; the first 13 years of lecturing was mortal

combat with medical doctors, but many seem ready now.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--

THE NUGENT REPORT (Page 2)

by Dr. Steve Nugent

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--

In 1971, a group of scientists conducted a study with a

naturally occurring plant saccharide called fucose. In chemistry we refer

to a sugar as a saccharide. This is fucose, not to be confused with

fructose or fruit sugar. The study found two important things. First the

dose concentration of fucose was the key to success. Second and most

exciting, was that if used in sufficient doses, that simple, safe,

natural nontoxic sugar was 100% effective in inhibiting the growth of

breast cancer tumors! There is no other natural substance that has been

that effective in a peer-reviewed, scientific study against breast

cancer.

What follows is the abstract from that study. In case you don't know, all

scientific studies start with an abstract page. This is a summary of the

study, and after reading it you'll know if you want to read the entire

study. There isn't sufficient space here to include each study quoted in

its entirety, so the abstract will have to do.

THE EFFECT OF L-FUCOSE ON RATE MAMMARY TUMOR GROWTH

In Vitro Studies

M Roseman. A. B., 1.

. Ph.D., 1

Murray H. Seltzer, MD., 1,2.

Wolfe, B.S. , 1. and Francis E. to, MD.,1. 3.

Different concentrations of L-fucose uniformly produced suppression in

the growth rate and a change in the morphology of cells grown in tissue

culture. The inhibition of growth of these malignant cells was found to

be concentrated dependent with 100% inhibition of growth at a

concentration of 50 mg fucose per millilitre of medium and 60% inhibition

at a concentration of 12.5 mg fucose per millilitre medium. Using other

sugars that are components of glycoproteins, it was shown that mannose

and galactose could also depress the rate of growth of these tumor cells

in culture. When 0.05 ml of packed tumor cells used in these experiments

was resuspended in 1 ml of medium and injected into a rat, a tumor grew

at the site of injection. This new tumor exhibited similar growth

characteristics and showed the same histological appearance as the tumor

from which the cell line was derived.

This is pretty exciting stuff!

Yes, the study was done on rats, not humans, but what scientists in their

right minds would take a chance of experimenting on human cancer

patients. This is a wonderful example of a complementary modality

fighting a disease with a medicine from nature. It is safe, nontoxic and

noninvasive. Doesn't that make sense? None of these rats had to suffer

through chemotherapy or radiation.

Since this was discovered in 1971, why didn't anybody use it?

The pharmaceutical companies were interested. They attempted to make

fucose into a drug. When they made fucose synthetically, it didn't work.

It only works in its natural state. At that time, there was no way to

patent fucose because it is a substance that occurs in nature. If you

can't patent it, you can't control the profits, and if you can't control

the profits, why spend the 250 million dollars in research it will take

to get it approved for use by the FDA? This is why it was forgotten about

and why all the tens of thousands women (and some men) who suffered from

breast cancer over the last 26 years, may have done so needlessly.

Just in case one of my readers is thinking about it, there is no one to

sue here. However, once doctors are made aware of this information and

the fact that there is a patented product containing fucose that is

available for the public (and has been since October of 1996), they would

be irresponsible not to inform their patients.

You do not get fucose in your diet, but your body is designed to make

fucose if nothing interferes with the process. I invite you to read my

articles on toxins in the environment and how they interfere with our

synthesis of fucose as well as five other saccharides necessary to the

health of all systems of our bodies. I can't take the space to discuss

all the details of toxins here; in fact, it would be impossible to cover

that subject correctly in less than about 200 pages.

I have created several audio tapes that deal in greater detail with the

threat of toxins in the environment and the first true hope with

glyconutritionals. I have been making educational tapes for doctors for

many years, but these are the most important tapes I have ever made! I do

not sell them myself, and I have given permission to the vendor to sell

them at ridiculously low prices, so that this vitally important

information can get into the hands of more people.

Each of us is biochemically unique. No two individuals will react to any

substance precisely the same way. Some of us resist the toxins better

than others. This is why some have glycoprotein abnormalities and the

diseases related to them and some do not. Glycoproteins are essential for

cell to cell communication. They are made in your endoplasmic reticulum.

They are found on the surface of all cells, and this makes them immensely

important.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE NUGENT REPORT (Page 3)

by Dr. Steve Nugent

Glycoprotein is composed of eight glycoconjugates. These glycoconjugates

are monosaccharides, mono meaning one, and as I mentioned earlier,

saccharide is the term used in chemistry to describe a sugar.

These monosaccharides are:

Glucose

Galactose

Fucose

Xylose

N-Acetylglucosamine

N-Acetylgalactosamine

N-Acetylneuraininic acid

Mannose

Please note that it is Fucose, not fruit sugar or Fructose. You may also

notice that the form of glucosamine required is N-Acetylglucosamine not

glucosamine sulphate. This is why so many people who try glucosamine

sulphate get no results with it. Some do get results, but that's only if

their bodies can convert the sulphate form correctly. Why take a chance

that you won't accomplish conversion correctly? Why waste your money?

Just obtain the correct form to begin with.

Mannose is by far the most important of these where the immune system is

concerned, but they are ALL essential. We get glucose and galactose from

our diets. But, if you are avoiding dairy, then you're not getting galactose

either.

Mannose can be obtained from diet, but none of us eat enough of the foods

that contain mannose to make a difference. Mannose is found in fungi for

example, and that includes mushrooms. There are a number of folk remedies

based on various forms of mushrooms, because of the mannose content. I

have tested every commonly known, as well as rare, mushrooms in my

practice from the very low-potency Reishi to the rare and extraordinary

Maitake and everything in between. None of these mushrooms including the

homegrown Russian variety perform as well as the glycoprotein complex.

As far as diet is concerned, we would need to eats pounds of mushrooms

per day to give us the mannose we need in today's toxic environment.

We used to get mannose from our bread because fungus commonly grows on

grain, especially wheat. Since some enterprising businessman invented the

process to refine flour back in 1911, we have lost the mannose as well as

at least 17 vitamins and minerals that naturally occur in wheat.

This strongly supports the argument for using dietary supplements. Not

long after industry started to refine wheat, cases of Beriberi and

Pellagra began to spring up. These are diseases associated only with

poor, underdeveloped countries where people are starving, not here in the

U.S. where the average person has a greater caloric intake than almost

anywhere in the world. What happened, then?

Refining flour takes out vitamin B1 and B3 (as well as 15 other

nutrients). Beriberi is caused by B1 deficiency, and Pellagra is caused

by B3 deficiency. I wrote about this five years ago in my first desk

reference, by the way.

The U.S. government then required that the bread companies enrich their

flour by adding back some, but not all, of the vitamins and minerals,

which were lost in refining.

The word enrich is quite humorous when used in the context of food

processing. In my desk reference I made the analogy of getting robbed and

having all of your money taken, then the robber gives you back a dollar,

so you can feel " enriched " after being robbed. So the federal government,

which has for so long fought the use of dietary supplements, was ordering

the bread companies to add food supplements to the flour to prevent

disease.

No significant numbers of heart disease patients were reported before the

invention of the refining process that took vitamin E out of flour,

either. If you don't believe me, check any medical anthropology text.

Well, this article isn't about vitamins so I need to get back on track.

When it comes to saving people from disease, we must look at any

scientific data that could lead to an answer. In veterinary medicine,

many important discoveries and observations have been made. One of the

world's most renowned veterinary immunologists, Dr. Ian R. Tizard, wrote

in a published paper entitled Carbohydrates, Immune Stimulating:

" There has long been a tradition in folk medicine that extracts of

certain fungi and plants may be of assistance in the treatment of cancer.

On investigation, many of these extracts have been found to possess potent

immune-stimulating activity. In many cases, this activity is attributable

to complex carbohydrates. These carbohydrates are usually large polymers

of glucose (glucans and lentinans), mannose (mannans), xylose

(hemicelluloses), frucose (levans) or mixtures of these sugars. "

These long chain sugar molecules are called polysaccharides; poly meaning

many and saccharides meaning sugar. It is important to know that not all

polysaccharides are created equal. Dr. Tizard continues by stating,

" Although common polysaccharides such as starch (alpha-1,4-glucan),

dextran (alpha-1,6-glucan) and inulin (fructan) do not have anti-tumor

activity, there is abundant evidence that some mannans and glucans are

very potent anticancer agents. "

Dr. Tizard is not alone; there is a new feeling of cautious optimism

among the scientists who are currently studying this new area of science.

THE NUGENT REPORT (Page 4)

by Dr. Steve Nugent

Science has no cure for collagen diseases, and until recently, science

had no idea why the diseases occurred. Although they shared certain

symptoms, researchers weren't clear as to whether or not they had

anything else in common. It seems they do indeed have something very

interesting in common.

All collagen-disease patients have genetically unique glycoproteins.

These patients have widespread immunological and inflammatory alterations

of connective tissue and may share any of the following symptoms or

findings: synovitis, pleuritis, myocarditis, endocarditis, pericarditis,

peritonitis, vasculitis, myositis, skin rash, alterations of connective

tissues, and nephritis.

Laboratory tests may reveal Coombs-positive hemolytic anemia,

thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, immunoglobulin excesses or deficiencies,

antinuclear antibodies (which include antibodies to many nuclear

constituents including DNA and extractable nuclear antigen), rheumatoid

factors, cryoglobulins, false-positive serologic tests for syphilis,

elevated muscle enzymes, and alterations in serum complement (Tierney et

al, 1994; page 681).

Examples of collagen (autoimmune) disease exhibiting one or more of the

above symptoms include rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile chronic arthritis,

systemic lupus erythematosus (lupus), progressive systemic sclerosis

(Scleroderma), polymyositis dermatomyositis, overlap (or mixed)

connective tissue disease, and Sjogren's Syndrome.

The causes of these autoimmune diseases have not yet been determined.

Genetics do seem to be involved, but there is a bigger picture here. It's

too easy to say, " Oh well, it's genetic, sorry " . Rheumatoid arthritis is

one example of this.

Since it's known that these patients have genetically unique collagen

glycoproteins, doctors have no option but to look at the new information

on these sugars. Since a patient can't be harmed by these sugars, a

doctor would be foolish and even irresponsible not to inform his or her

patients of these new advances. There are numerous functions that

glycoproteins serve in the body -- glycoprotein collagens acting as

structural molecules illustrates just one of them. It should be obvious

to you at this point that glycoprotein abnormalities do play a key role

in disease.

Current nutrition science textbooks stress the importance of proper diet

to obtain essential vitamins, minerals, proteins (amino acids) and fats

in great detail; sugars are currently recognized only as a source of

energy, not as substances essential to glycoprotein production for good

health. These textbooks used by doctors, nurses and dietitians say that

the human body only requires two saccharides and we get them from food.

Well, that's almost correct. We do get two of the glycoprotein

saccharides the body requires from food, but we need eight -- not two.

In contrast to the nutrition textbooks, the textbook Harper's

Biochemistry, (Murray et al., 1996) lists eight monosaccharides commonly

found in human glycoproteins which are known to be important to the

healthy functioning of the human body. Those are the eight

glycoconjugates I mentioned earlier. These eight can be derived from as

many as 200 different plants not typically found in the human diet.

Of the required eight sugars named in Harper's Biochemistry, only glucose

and galactose are addressed in the classic nutrition texts; the other six

are omitted.

Modern nutrition textbooks give the principal sources of dietary

carbohydrates as; 1) maize, rice, wheat, and potato, which yield starches

composed of glucose; 2) sugar cane and beet sugar which yield glucose;

and 3) milk which yields galactose and glucose (Shils et al., 1994).

Lactose-intolerant individuals who do not eat dairy products will be

deficient even in galactose, since the body manufactures galactose from

the lactose in dairy products. The remaining six sugars must either be

synthesized by the body or obtained from dietary supplements.

While the body uses certain dietary sugars as raw materials to build

glycoproteins, enzymes are the tools the body uses to build them. Enzymes

cause (catalyze) chemical reactions in other substances without being

destroyed or altered themselves when the reaction is completed.

To function properly, enzymes require adequate supplies of substrate. In

the case of glycoprotein production, the substrates are the eight sugars

mentioned above. Most important: this process does not occur at optimal

capacity if adequate supplies of substrate (necessary sugars) are not

available (Murray, 1996).

Can the glycoprotein complex harm you? The answer is a resounding NO!!

Every system of your body requires them. Just as you require air and

water. You won't expire as quickly with glycoprotein deficiency or

imbalance as you will without air or water, but your body will become a

victim of disease if it cannot either manufacture or obtain these

glyconutritionals from diet.

In my January 1995 newsletter, I explained something called LD50. I won't

go over it again. Suffice it to say that, researchers were unable to

create toxicity with these glyconutritionals in laboratory animals and

were therefore unable to establish a level that could be harmful to

humans. In plain English, glyconutritionals are safe!

In summary, we do need supplemental glycoconjugates if we are to resist

the ravages of our toxic environment, and, hopefully, prevent the related

autoimmune and degenerative free-radical diseases. Knowing what you know

now, you would be exceedingly foolish not to use the latest scientific

advances in this area.

Do I know for certain that by using the complete glycoprotein complex you

will never develop an autoimmune disease? No, it would be ridiculous to

say that. I know only that until now we had no hope except potentially

dangerous and toxic drugs that simply suppressed or controlled symptoms,

but offered no hope for a cure.

Using these glycoconjugates can't harm you, and they may be your keys to

success, so why hesitate?

As far as cancer is concerned, once again, we have strong evidence of the

immune-stimulating properties as well as anti-tumor activity of these

saccharides, and they are far, far safer than drugs.

In the next article I will discuss other saccharides for the immune

system. In a future article I will be discussing why yams are no scam.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Nugent is Past President of the American Naturopathic Medical

Association, and President of the International Association of

Complementary Medicine.