Questions related to N. Z Farmer Smith and Leukemia

[Johnwen]

Cmon Joshween, you are completely out of perspective, lol.

I really don't understand this comment???

I'm saying getting a quick blood draw will give a person peace of mind that the treatment they will be receiving will do no harm. Then why not???

Maybe you had a bad weed or something

Maybe you should wait till your head clears to make such comments not everyone does what you do!

[majkinetor]

I really don't understand this comment???
I'm saying getting a quick blood draw will give a person peace of mind that the treatment they will be receiving will do no harm. Then why not???

That was sarcasm intended to hit 'the other dude'. Sometimes it fails on the internet.
In other words, I totally agree with you

Maybe you should wait till your head clears to make such comments not everyone does what you do!

Owen said I did it, not me. Perhaps you should read more carefully.

[ofonorow]

My question would be, "Why not get tested if your going to get IV-C?" It's a CHEAP fast test and most labs don't require a script to do it. However they will want your doc's name etc. to send hm/her the results also. Which just says -or+!!

Here's some info I found on it!

http://www.orthomolecular.org/library/ivccancerpt.shtml

http://www.kumed.com/medical-services/i ... amin-c-faq

Here's an overview from G6PD.Org
There are internal links for more info.

http://g6pddeficiency.org/index.php

I've seen the last link before, and I believe it puts vitamin C "risk" a mild, and aspirin risk as "high". (added: See http://g6pddeficiency.org/index.php?cmd=contraindicated for this web sites evaluation of risk, ascorbic acid "low risk", aspirin "high risk").

So why don't they recommend this blood test for people before they take aspirin?

I still haven't seen ANY evidence that such a deficiency will subject the person to harm from high dose vitamin C.

And from all this extra reading, it appears Dr. Levy is correct, the problem is a lack of glutathione.

And if the supposed risk is "death," why risk something like NAC for protection? The enzyme to create GSH is missing or reduced, isn't this what the problem is? And I don't believe NAC can/will work without vitamin C, as all cells already have the GSH building blocks, eg. cysteine, glycine, glutatate, etc. ?

Ergo, the advise to use NAC in the case of G6PD deficiency is flawed, and the advice to add liposomal glutathione makes a great deal of sense.

[Johnwen]

This seems to be a CYA situatition. It appears that if a clinic gives a high dose IV-C and the person has a bad reaction and the lawyers get a hold of it. I'm sure this subject would have to be covered by testing otherwise the clinic would be negligent.
Anyway here's a write up from 1993 that shows what owen says is accurate.
Scroll down about a 1/2 page to "Lesson of the week"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... 3-0043.pdf

[ofonorow]

Thanks for finding that report.

From a cursory reading, it seems that we now know that before 1993, there were "no cautions" about vitamin C re: G6PD, and only two case reports. (One from Indian children attributed to taking a lot of "fizzy" drinks!?

This case is interesting, as 40 g IVs (three times weekly) and 20-30 g vitamin C by mouth over the course of a month had no effect on an HIV+ black man with the sickle cell trait. (Later found to have the G6PD deficiency.)

Then, supposedly a single 80 g IV dose was thought to cause the blood breakdown event, (symptom: dark urine), which was corrected with fluids and folic acid?

My first question is what happened that precipitated the decision to double the IV dosage from 40 to 80 g? (This information would be helpful in understanding whether the increased vitamin C, or the underlying condition being treated was at fault.)