Skip to main content

THE REGENERATION EFFECT
Home  SHOP  Radiation Crises Antidote  Regenerative Lifestyles  Current Events  Education  Diseases FAQs  Essential Links  RE Survival  Who We Are   
Arthritis
Autism
Cancer Phytopharmacology
Cancer Research
Cancer
Cancer Resources
Chronic Fatigue
CFIDS Resources
Coagulation Disorder
Diabetes
Digestive Disorders
Energy-Fatigue
Female Health
Fibromyalgia
Headahces
Heart Disease
Hypothyroidism
Immune Issues
Lyme Disease
Male Health
Memory
Mental Conditions
Metal Detox
Nuerofibromatosis
Neurological Conditions
Respiratory Conditions
Skin Conditions
Weight Problems
Cancer Does Not Exist in a Regenerated Body
(c) 2013 by Dr. John W. Apsley  www.doctorapsley.com email: John@DrApsley.com
 

 

So, you have been diagnosed with Lymphoma or another cancer? Well, you've come to the right website to understand what's happening to you and to learn what you can do about it.

 

Our approach is simple - treat the patient, not the disease - exactly as Hippocrates instructed 2500 years ago. And we treat the patient by inducing and restoring The Regeneration Effect within by way of the Four Pillars. This is systematically accomplished starting at the cell level on up.
 
At the most fundamental cellular level, The Regeneration Effect optimizes the normal healthy cell cycle first, then repairs the genes and metabolism of the patient. By implementing Four Pillars, we restore and enhance The Regeneration Effect within, which is namely (1) Daily Detoxification, (2) Maximal Oxygenation, (3) Regenerative Nourishment and (4) BioEnergetic Medicine which includes Psychoneurosomatics (mind over matter). The latter involves energy medicine as well such as BioAcoustics. These Four Pillars then drives the sequential, precise and continuous regeneration of our cells all the way to optimizing immune cell functions when properly incorporated into a daily lifestyle.
 
At the all-encompassing mind-body level, restoring The Regeneration Effect within is induced in accordance with the patient's unique constitution (that is according to their: blood type, metabolic type, acquired mental & physical weaknesses and strengths, and fundamental lifestyle values and practices).
 
In this manner, The Regeneration Effect within produces a thriving & resilient state within our cells and tissues, nothing less. Specifically, the restoring process (which is implemented via a straightforward daily routine) engages The Regeneration Effect within. This in turn empowers the body's 10 to 75 trillion human cells to:
 
  1. Reboot their natural è healthy è cell cycle programming (especially by restoring essential and proper cell death programming - i.e., apoptosis, paraptosis, terminal autophagy, necroptosis & autoschizis).
  2. At the genetic level: è (i) restore tumor suppressor gene functions, i.e., p53, p27, p21, è (ii) optimize gene repair via HHR & NHEJ, plus è (iii) protect telomere length of healthy cells and disrupt telomere length of rogue cells.
  3. Tweak and synchronize cellular energy production via è mitochondrial regeneration via PGC-1α, and then è maximize mitochondrial function according to the patient's inherited metabolic individuality.
  4. Regenerate è cells è tissues and  è organs from the cell level on up (the only means to heal our human constitution and establish cellular, tissue and organ resilience within our future generations), and excite accelerated repair rates.
  5. Optimize immune function & integrity over the è short and è long term to develop permanent immunity against rogue cell growth in the future.

 

You see, thriving cells know when its time to make room for their replacement with the next generation of thriving cells by exiting the scene. In all forms of chronic degenerative disease, the opposite occurs, and rogue cells just keep multiplying in excess without proper checks, balances and healthy replacements.

 
More specifically, this natural, healthy cell death programming is specifically over-written in rogue, degenerating cells (such as cancer cells) by "false coding" molecules. In cancer, these false coding molecules are called tumor NOX proteins (tNOX or ENOX2). ENOX2 proteins indeed appear to be the Rosetta Stone to best decipher the riddle to cancer.
 
Unfortunately, in contra-distinction to restoring The Regeneration Effect within cells as the best approach to solving the riddle to cancer, chemotherapeutic agents may actually worsen the effects of these "false coding" molecules, rendering the cancer many times more aggressive than before! See: [Here]. So, where does one start???
 
 
The ONCOblot Test®  is arguably the biggest breakthrough in oncology today. The ONCOblot Test®  detects ENOX2 proteins, essential for all cancers studied to date. A Breast Mammography requires over a trillion cancer cells to accurately provide information leading to a diagnosis of cancer. By comparison, only 2 million cancer cells are required for the ONCOblot Test® to correctly identify a serious problem. And earlier detection always favors a better clinical outcome. Also by sequential testing for ENOX2 proteins, we can accurately track progress better than any other currently available testing method. This simple blood test is now available for a fraction of the cost of MRI, CAT-Scan or PET-Scan technologies. Plus, it is a simple blood test, and can be drawn at any commercial lab in the U.S. For more information on the ENOX2 testing process, click: [Here] To find out more about how to get tested, click [Here] or simply email Dr. Apsley.
 
Accurate Tracking + Regeneration = Best Solution
 
Once The Regeneration Effect takes full hold (as per 1-5 above), the ENOX2 proteins simply disappear, and wellness rules over a constitutionally resilient body. So, just what do we mean by The Regeneration Effect?
 
To get a sense about the basics to The Regeneration Effect, let's start at the level of the test tube. Watch the short and fascinating 15 minute TED video by Dr. Mina Bissell: [Here]
 
In respectful distinction to Dr. Bissell's monumental work in the test tube, our work is based on real patients. We target the entire body of our patients for regeneration. In this manner (that is by not treating a disease), the body's restored resilience insures disease-free living. You see, only a resilient immune system cures disease - enabling diseased tissues to be replaced with resilient tissues. This is why direct medical treatment of disease is at best a distant second in comparison. And when physicians instruct their patients how to maintain this cellular resilience, we enjoy a full, long and happy life. Read more [Here]
 
The mission of modern conventional medicine is to achieve an absence of disease, as opposed to managing patients into thriving states of wellness and optimal self-healing. The mission of conventional medicine to control and manage disease is in stark contrast to Integrative Regenerative Medicine's mission. Integrative Regenerative Medicine embraces that "curing" disease, any disease, arises from The Regeneration Effect within. Read more [Here]
 
As a direct result of practicing the former, (1) health care costs sky-rocket, (2) chronic degenerative disease escalate unchecked, and (3) the entire system becomes more and more unsustainable. As a direct result of the latter, (A) health care costs will plummet, (B) the minds and bodies of the folks regenerates, and (C) the collective culture regenerates, thrives and re-establishes the long living.
 
Select cultures have practiced uninterrupted regenerative lifestyles successfully for thousands of years. These thriving cultures rarely, if ever, contract cancer because they live an economical regenerative lifestyle. In this manner, and in this manner only, do folks thrive over a long lifetime, as opposed to simply survive. Read entire page: [Here]
 
Cultures who practice regenerative lifestyles typically (A) have no hospitals, (B) little to no need of physicians, and (C) earn annual incomes of under $1,000 per year.  
 
Therefore, I and many others are now concluding that only The Regeneration Effect within can cure chronic degenerative diseases such as cancer. This is the core reason why approaches such as ours that treat the patient and not the disease are becoming recongnized as the wave of the future. See: [Here]
 
With this approach now explained, let us consider the unintended consequences of modern conventional medicine. According to recent research, chemotherapy has been determined to be only ~2.3% effective. Overall conventional treatments have been discovered with a most serious downside. That is, both conventional chemotherapy and radiation therapy unfortunately activate the formation of new, highly invasive and aggressive cancer cells by as much as 30 fold.
 
The Latest on Conventional Chemotherapy
 
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol).2004 Dec;16(8):549-60.
The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies.
 
Abstract: We undertook a literature search for randomised clinical trials reporting a 5-year survival benefit attributable solely to cytotoxic chemotherapy in adult malignancies. The total number of newly diagnosed cancer patients for 22 major adult malignancies was determined from cancer registry data in Australia and from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results data in the USA for 1998. For each malignancy, the absolute number to benefit was the product of (a) the total number of persons with that malignancy; (b) the proportion or subgroup(s) of that malignancy showing a benefit; and (c) the percentage increase in 5-year survival due solely to cytotoxic chemotherapy. The overall contribution was the sum total of the absolute numbers showing a 5-year survival benefit expressed as a percentage of the total number for the 22 malignancies.The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA.
 

Conclusion: As the 5-year relative survival rate for cancer in Australia is now over 60%, it is clear that cytotoxic chemotherapy only makes a minor contribution to cancer survival. To justify the continued funding and availability of drugs used in cytotoxic chemotherapy, a rigorous evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and impact on quality of life is urgently required.

 

AND:

 

Nature Medicine Published online August 5, 2010

Treatment-induced damage to the tumor microenvironment promotes prostate cancer therapy resistance through WNT16B

Sun Y, Campisi J, Higano C, Beer TM, Porter P, Coleman I, True L, Nelson PS. 

 

Abstract

 

Acquired resistance to anticancer treatments is a substantial barrier to reducing the morbidity and mortality that is attributable to malignant tumors. Components of tissue microenvironments are recognized to profoundly influence cellular phenotypes, including susceptibilities to toxic insults. Using a genome-wide analysis of transcriptional responses to genotoxic stress induced by cancer therapeutics, we identified a spectrum of secreted proteins derived from the tumor microenvironment that includes the Wnt family member wingless-type MMTV integration site family member 16B (WNT16B). We determined that WNT16B expression is regulated by nuclear factor of κ light polypeptide gene enhancer in B cells 1 (NF-κB) after DNA damage and subsequently signals in a paracrine manner to activate the canonical Wnt program in tumor cells. The expression of WNT16B in the prostate tumor microenvironment attenuated (rendered useless) the effects of cytotoxic chemotherapy in vivo, promoting tumor cell survival and disease progression.These results delineate a mechanism by which genotoxic therapies (chemotherapy) given in a cyclical manner can enhance subsequent treatment resistance through cell nonautonomous effects that are contributed by the tumor microenvironment.

 

* * *  

 

The Latest on Conventional Radiation Therapy

 

"Researchers from the Department of Radiation Oncology at the UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center report that radiation treatment transforms cancer cells into treatment-resistant breast cancer stem cells, even as it kills half of all tumor cells.

 

“When we look at early-stage cancer patients, we compare patients receiving exactly the same treatment, and some fail and some are cured, and we can't predict who those patients will be,” says Frank Pajonk, MD, PhD, the study's senior author and an associate professor of radiation oncology and Jonsson Cancer Center researcher.

 

In some cases, cancer stem cells are generated by the therapy, but scientists do not yet understand all the mechanisms that cause this to occur. If they can determine the pathway and remove the reprogramming of cancer cells, they ultimately may be able to reduce the amount of radiation given to patients along with its accompanying side effects, says Dr. Pajonk.

 

The investigators found that induced breast cancer stem cells (iBCSCs) were generated by radiation-induced activation of the same cellular pathways used to reprogram normal cells into induced pluripotent stem cells in regenerative medicine.

 

In the study, Dr. Pajonk and colleagues eliminated the smaller pool of BCSCs and then irradiated the remaining breast cancer cells and put them in mice. They were able to observe the initial generation into iBCSCs in response to the radiation treatment through a unique imaging system. These new cells were highly similar to the BCSCs that had been found in tumors that had not been irradiated.They also found that these iBCSCs had a more than 30-fold increased ability to form tumors than the nonirradiated breast cancer cells.

 

Their findings show that if tumors are challenged by certain stressors that threaten them (such as radiation), they generate iBCSCs that may, along with surviving cancer stem cells, produce more tumors.

 

The researchers' work continues as they begin to identify the pathways and several classes of drugs to prevent this process from occurring. To date, they have identified 2 different targets and drugs that could prevent it. The group has published their results of the study in breast cancer but also has made similar observations in both glioblastoma and head and neck cancer.

 

Dr. Pajonk says the study does not discredit radiation therapy. “Patients come to me scared by the idea that radiation generates these cells, but it truly is the safest and most effective therapy there is.'”

 

Dr. Apsley: I say that we must re-evaluate this fateful downside to conventional treatments so that natural methods can be better understood and adopted. See: [Here]. But Dr. Pajonk's point of view may be myopic since this is just one of several fateful downsides conventional treatments typically brings about. Keep reading...

 

The United Kingdom's socialized medical system incorporates many of the identical conventional cancer treatments widely utilized in the United States. A comprehensive long term study brought to light the alarming fact that up to 40% of UK patients die from the medical treatment and not their cancer during the first 30 days. In my opinion, eclectic approaches to treatment will correct this fateful downside.. See: [Here] 

 

For the record, natural approaches with proven track records do not suffer from these high-stake risks. For example:

 

"In a series of open label sequential trials 36% of cancer patients with active disease (breast, lung, kidney, ovarian and prostate cancer) reported significant prolongation of life and/or remain alive and 32% reported statistically significant improvement. Nearly all of the patients had received extensive chemo- and radiation therapy, yet the green tea/capsicum only protocol was still of significant benefit." See: [Here]

 

And see: [Here] and [Here]

 

 

For more information on where patients may undergo natural methods that induce the Regeneration Effect within, enabling the body to cure itself, feel free to email me at John@DrApsley.com 

 

 

Sources:

  1. Su YC, Lin YH, Zeng ZM, Shao KN, Chueh PJ. Chemotherapeutic agents enhance cell migration and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition through transient up-regulation of tNOX (ENOX2) protein. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2012 Nov;1820(11):1744-52.
  2. Sun Y, Campisi J, Higano C, Beer TM, Porter P, Coleman I, True L, Nelson PS. Treatment-induced damage to the tumor microenvironment promotes prostate cancer therapy resistance through WNT16B. Nat Med. 2012 Sep;18(9):1359-68.
  3.  Lagadec C, Vlashi E, Della Donna L, Dekmezian C, Pajonk F. Radiation-induced reprogramming of breast cancer cells. Stem Cells. 2012;30:833-4.
  4. Printz C. Radiation treatment generates therapy-resistant cancer stem cells from less aggressive breast cancer cells. Cancer. 2012 Jul 1;118(13):3225.
  5. Mort D, et al. For better, for worse? A review of the care of patients who died within 30 days of receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy. The National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death (NCEPOD). 4-8 Maple Street, London, W1T5HD. 2008. ISBN 978-0-9560882-0-8.
  6. D. M. Morré DM, Morré DJ. Catechin-vanilloid synergies with potential clinical applications in cancer. Rejuvenation Res. 2006;9:45-55.
  7. Flavin DF. A lipoxygenase inhibitor in breast cancer brain metastases. J Neurooncol. 2007 Mar;82(1):91-3.
  8. Pandey M, Gupta S. Green tea and prostate cancer: from bench to clinic. Front Biosci (Elite Ed). 2009 June 1; 1: 13–25.