Alternate Cancer Remedies
Gold’s theory was the antithesis of accepted medical principles. Surgery and radiation had ruled for decades; but, in the 1950s, high-priced cancer drugs entered the picture more than ever before. By the late 1960s, it was becoming obvi- ous to thoughtful practitioners and researchers that the physical damage by chemical toxicity was as great as that caused by surgical cutting and radiation therapy.
Chemotherapy was keyed to placing high tox- icity—poison, if you will—at the site of the cancer, in order to kill it. But, in the process, the entire system was greatly weakened, sometimes without recovering.
In contrast, Gold suggested that, instead of trying to kill the cancer cell, we need only block its ability to injure other cells.
Gold had studied the work of Otto Warburg, and his theory of the nature of cancer cell me- tabolism. According to Warburg, all cancer cells live by fermenting sugar in what are essentially “airless” (anaerobic) reactions. Find a way of stop- ping this fermentation, and you will be able to stop the cancer.
Later, in the 1950s, Dr. Dean Burk and asso- ciates at the National Cancer Institute had delved into Warburg’s contribution. Burk won a scien- tific prize for demonstrating that Warburg was correct in his views about cancer ferments. (How- ever, it was also discovered that, although rarely, cancer cells do use oxygen respiration; and, occa- sionally, some normal cells have fermenting mecha- nisms.)
For a short time, oxalic acid (which blocked fermentation) was tried as a cancer remedy, but it failed. Like regular chemotherapy, it was so toxic that it injured regular cells as much as cancer cells.
With all this information in hand, Joseph Gold went beyond either Warburg or Burk. He devel- oped an enlarged theory:
A primary cause of death from cancer is the weight loss and debilitation which occurs. The medical name for this is cachexia. But why does it occur? If it could somehow to interrupted, the disease could be brought under control.
But what causes cachexia? Why is the can- cer patient reduced to skin and bones while his tumor grows vigorously? Orthodox medical theory had no answer to this. Here was Gold’s theory:
Cachexia is the result of cancer’s ability to “recycle its wastes.” But it does this by over- loading the body with the task of trying to dis- charge those wastes. The resultant energy drain results in emaciation.
So far, this theory closely paralleled aspects of the Gerson theory. But, while the Gerson theory held that it was the toxic wastes introduced into the body through bad living, diet, etc., which in- duced cachexia, pain, and death from liver over- load, Gold attributed the problem solely to an ex- cess of lactic acid:
While regular cells use oxygen for energy, cancer uses glucose (sugar) as the fuel. But the result is fermentation. The sugar only partially metabolizes, or combusts. The waste product, which is lactic acid, is ejected by the cancer cells and carried by the blood to the liver and kidneys. But lactic acid is not simply expelled from the body. Instead, it is reconverted in the liver back into glucose. But the body must now expend a great amount of energy doing this.
The glucose is then poured into the blood stream, and picked up by the cancer cells—and used as still more fuel! The vicious cycle broad- ens and deepens.
“The net result is a loss of energy from nor- mal body energy ‘pools.’ As the cancer grows, its production of lactic acid grows, imposing on the body a condition in which the normal body energy ‘pools’ become more and more de- pleted.”—Joseph Gold, Cancer Research Insti- tute, Informational Brochure, 1979. Eventually rapid weight loss and debility re- sults—cachexia.
“Cachexia is but the end result of an insidi- ous process—unrecognizable at first, but slowly taking its toll of the body’s reserves until a ‘point of no return’ is reached. Cachexia begins with the very first cancer tissue. What we need is a way to stop the vicious cycle and thereby put a halt to the leading cause of death in cancer: cachexia.”—Joseph Gold, “Proposed Treatment of Cancer by Inhibition of Gluconeogenesis,” Oncology, 22:185-207, 1968. So far, Gold’s research was fully approved by the powers that be, for it was in the realm of theory. But then he set to work in search of a substance which could block this interaction between the liver and the cancer cells. Trying one thing and then another (including the amino acid tryp- tophane), everything seemed to fail.
Then, in the early 1970s, Gold read a research paper which stated that hydrazine sulfate had the ability to block a key enzyme in the liver— which allowed lactic acid to be converted into glucose.
First, Gold tried hydrazine sulfate on four dif- ferent transplantable tumor systems in animals. It seemed to work fairly well, and supported Gold’s theory. Cancer cells in the test tube were not