Friday, October 24, 2008

Triamazon - convicted cancer pill peddler's stupid mistakes

Warning, this is a very long post!

I blogged a little while back about Andrew Harris, the man recently convicted of selling Triamazon pills for cancer. Selling people false hope, especially for cancer, is something I strongly dislike, so I'm taking it upon myself today to go through his website's front page and pull apart his claims. I have no medical training, you don't need it to see through him - just a little logical thought. I take no responsibility if he changes his page in the future, but I shall quote the whole page as it stands now, including all the links. I have only stripped out the formatting.

The Triamazon website contains an inspiring story of despair and hope, cancer gone into remission and dastardly drug companies covering up THE TRUTH. Also the government are out to get him as he is a lone crusader for THE TRUTH. But mainly he's a wishful thinker guilty of muddy thinking (at best) or a drug dealer (at worst, and no I don't excuse him on the grounds that he's not selling you something to get you high) or possibly somewhere in between.

I am Andrew Harris of

I was diagnosed with NHL Lymphoma Cancer of the Immune system around 4 and half years ago.

I was told by the head haematologist at Trafford general hospital that there is no cure for my type of cancer and that all the hospital could do was treat the symptoms.

I started combination chemotherapy 
R-CHOP with Prednisolone steroids, I had eight lots of chemo I went through hell, my teeth crumbled my fillings fell out and my appendix went acute and I had it removed, I also had a trapped cranial nerve that gave me immense pain in my jaw teeth and face 24/7 for weeks until the hospital reduced the amount of Vincristine.

I had to have Morphine and Pethidine at the A+E many a time as the toxicity wreaked havoc on my whole body and major organs including my Peripheral Nervous System. I have had to undergo a double Angioplasty to my right coronary artery due to the damage of chemotherapy.

After I had endured 8 lots of this chemo my cancer went dormant but was still there but not doing anything so I was classed as in remission, 14 months later I relapsed and the cancer spread to my neck, my chest, my abdomen and it had come back with such a vengeance I was classed as a stage 3 patient.
I was then put back on the same regimen of chemo for a further 6 lots totalling 14 lots of chemo.

On the tenth lot of chemo I found out about Acetogenins Novel Alkaloids and Phytochemicals as an alternative that's non toxic to healthy cells but lethal to cancer cells.

I was gobsmacked to learn that a famous drug company had spent millions trying to make a synthetic from these so they could claim sole exclusivity via a patent for marketing purposes, however, the company were unsuccessful in getting a synthetic derivative to work after years of research and they decided to lock away their findings from the public and rival drug companies because this is natural non toxic and kills many cancer strains with lethal precision without harming normal healthy cells and tissue.

I'm enclosing links (at the bottom of this webpage from Pubmed) a medical research database of the US Government known as Pubmed for you to see i'm telling you the truth!

During my research I came across 
ASPARTAME and RUMSFELD DISEASE which shows that a Carcinogen and Neurotoxin has been allowed in fizzy pop soda drinks and also in around 6000 and 9000 food products, ASDA have currently withdrawn it from it's own brand yet the MHRA deem it fit for consumption in the UK, just search Google for (Rumsfeld disease or Aspartame) and you'll see why we have a cancer epidemic.

The majority of the public have no idea about this and it is of major public interest.

I got full complete remissions with no clinical signs of cancer after consuming Acetogenins novel alkaloids and Phytochemicals, my medical record is my evidence I used at court which can be verified via my solicitor Keith Dyson 0161 832 9933.

I'm very sorry to hear his story of getting cancer. Genuinely, I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. I would be slightly more convinced that these acetogenins et c. were the cause of his remission if he hadn't undergone lengthy chemotherapy first. However it is perfectly possible that these compounds are effective against cancer.
What the hell that has to do with Aspartame is anyone's guess.
I set up a couple of websites to blow the whistle on what I had discovered and to make the product Triamazon (which I named as a brand and which I import from the USA) to make available to people around the world.
The capsules are manufactured by a reputable company with over 40 years in the alternative pharmaceutical industry licensed by the FDA.

The MHRA (Medicines Healthcare Regulatory Authority) raided me and took Triamazon for testing back in February 2008.
My solicitor has exhausted every avenue in an attempt to get the results of the MHRA testing on Triamazon, even though I have a right under the freedom of information act, they will not hand over the test results also the MHRA have not issued any health concerns regarding Triamazon 8 months after the raid.

The complaints which were made were about me breaking the cancer act of 1939 (which is English law) NOT about Triamazon as a product.
Many customers have contacted the press praising Triamazon and the benefits it gave them as cancer patients.
But as we all know, the government controls the media and only print what they want you to hear.

The MHRA has to ensure that only licensed medicines are on sale to the public, this is because only licensed medicines have been through the proper testing. Triamazon has not been tested, at least yet - more on that later. The Cancer Act 1939 is designed to stop frauds selling false hope to cancer sufferers. The MHRA tests on Triamazon, I strongly suspect, would have been to find out what was in it - not clinical trials to find out its possible curative effects. Customers contacting the press praising any medicine carry very little weight with editors. They can only have anecdotal evidence, which at the very best can only be treated as a starting point for clinical trials. Personal experiences are never proof.
Government controlling the media? Sounds like any other conspiracy theorist to me.
The MHRA allowed SEROXATVIOXCELLIBREX AND ASPARTAME plus many more including STATINS onto the market for public consumption which have caused fatalities and are now being subject to lawsuits for damages.

Yes, medicines with bad side effects have got through the licensing net before now. This is not a convincing argument to allow medicines through with less testing is it now?
The MHRA gets its revenue in the form of licence fees via the pharmaceutical companies, the MHRA are criminally negligent and are themselves a real threat to public health.

They weren't negligent in your case were they? And I think it would be more accurate to say they get some of their money from licence fees.
Personal injury claims are rife in the USA.

This is what's known as a non-sequitur.
The public deserve the truth and when your sent home from hospital to get your affairs in order because there is nothing more they can do as the chemo has become ineffective then where does one turn to?

If alternatives cannot be advertised for cancer due to a 70 year old legislation then they will not be found by those in need!

Cancer Act 1939 has been responsible for more deaths that the 2 world wars.

The whole system is about money, as there is no money in any cure, only in treating the symptoms with repeat prescriptions.
The chemo manufacturers are bleeding the NHS of its cash.

My Triamazon capsules work, and they are a mere price compared to chemotherapy, even viagra costs more than Triamazon pill for pill!

If your triamazon capsules work then you should be able to prove it. Get them put through the proper testing, then you'll have proof. Until then you only have your own words.
I have been turned into a criminal for blowing the whistle and for helping people.

Speak to Keith Dyson Solicitor or better still speak with LOUISE BLACKWELL QC of
Cobden House Chambers Manchester, she is working on this case as the cancer act 1939 violates the articles 9, 10 and 14 of the human rights act. She will confirm that Triamazon is a viable therapy for cancer, If my pills are worthless as stated then why am I not in jail for committing deception!

You turned yourself into a criminal by violating the law. You have no proof that Triamazon works. Solicitors are not qualified to tell me if a medicine works. You are not in jail because you have already received the maximum sentence for a first offence under the Cancer Act 1939. See, it's not all that draconian a piece of legislation is it?

Here are the links I promised you.

Sceptics please see... 
The official independent "Research White Paper" on the proven effectiveness of selected Acetogenins, by clicking on this link below...

Are you still sceptic? Here is more evidence direct from the US Government PUBMED central medical research database, Click on these links below

State Key Laboratory of Bioorganic and Natural Product Chemistry, Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 354 Fenglin Road, Shanghai 200032, China.
Departamento de Farmacología, Laboratorio de Farmacognosia, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Valencia, 46100 Burjassot, Valencia, Spain.

TRIAMAZON beats (MDR) Multi Drug Resistant Breast Cancer MCF-7/Adr cells, and is (250 times more potent) than the standard hospital regimen of Vincristine, Vinblastine and Adriamycin Chemotherapy Drugs.

Click the link below, see the proof on PUBMED! 7950?dop%20t=Citation

These are the ingredients in Triamazon which were tested against Colon, Breast, Lung, Liver, and Ovarian tumour cell lines, a drug-resistant ovarian cell line was also included in the panel. In general the compounds in the product Triamazon are more potent than doxorubicin. Doxorubicin (trade name Adriamycin) a chemotherapy Drug and unlike chemotherapy drugs... Triamazon does not harm healthy cells or tissue.

Now See What the US Government Medical Database for Medical Research says (about the ingredients) included that make up Triamazon. See the Medical Truth of Safe Phytochemical Based Natural Substances that Doctors and your Oncologist has no knowledge even existed!

Click on this link

Do have a look at the links he provides, they do show that there is some promise in the ingredients which he claims are in Triamazon. Wait a minute, they are being tested and the results published for all to read? Hmmm, hardly sounds to me like:

a famous drug company had spent millions trying to make a synthetic from these so they could claim sole exclusivity via a patent for marketing purposes, however, the company were unsuccessful in getting a synthetic derivative to work after years of research and they decided to lock away their findings from the public and rival drug companies

Nothing he has posted shows that these compounds do not harm healthy tissue however. It is not enough to show that it kills cancer, it also needs to have an acceptable level of side-effects.
What the links do show is that research is happening on these substances, and that they show promise. All the studies linked to are in-vitro studies (in test-tubes or petri dishes). This is the first stage of clinical trials, many substances which show promise at that stage do not prove to be as successful later on when tested in vivo

Here is some truth about Cannabis

Take a few minutes to educate yourself by clicking on the links regarding Cannabis and ask yourself why governments oppose the Medical Benefits on offer from this plant and all it has to offer in the battle against cancer and other ailments, most of us already know that like Triamazon, it too, cannot be patented, and the ingredients were kept from public knowledge and therefore is seen as a threat to the profits of the chemotherapy manufacturing drug cartel of companies, hence the bad press by government control against the non-patentable effective CAM (Complimentary Alternative Medicine) industry to protect incoming big license fees from the real drug dealers AKA the pharmaceutical industry who due to products like SEROXAT and VIOX have ruined many lives and caused many to die, yes that's right we at are having a go at big pharma in the name of all mankind!

Breast Cancer Wiped Out By Cannabis. 4oPaSnjHawo

California leads the way for Medical Cannabis Vending Machines. m/watch?v=oe_6opRXOcg
American Kids Prescribed Cannabis (UK Gov't lies on THC Exposed )

UK Government FRANK lies on Cannabis Exposed !

House of Lords stated 10 years ago LEGALISE MEDICAL CANNABIS

This is enough evidence to show the majority of Governments cannot be trusted when it concerns our health, especially when our very own law lords recommended the use of cannabis for medical use over ten years ago!

What on earth does cannabis have to do with anything else on this page?

So in short, Andrew Harris got cancer, he received treatment after which he went into remission. He wants to ascribe that remission to some natural products he took at the end of that treatment rather than the treatment itself. He now wants to sell that to other people and is convinced that his message is being unjustly suppressed. However he has no actual proof at all that his product does any good. He does show there is some interest in the compounds from Big Pharma (not those evil-doers surely?) and the compounds in Triamazon may yet prove to be an effective cancer treatment. But on the other hand, maybe they won't. Without proof the medicine will not get licensed by the MHRA. Being 'natural' is no guarantee that it will be effective, or safe, and until it is proven to be both of those things anyone trying to sell it is a charlatan. Along the way he seems to descend into conspiracy theory, which is never a good sign of a rational mind.

Survival rates from cancer have never been better, and it's not because people are allowed to sell unproven medicines or because Big Pharma are a bunch of money grabbing bastards either. Well, this post is quite long enough without me pulling Andrew Harris apart any more. I think largely he's hung himself with his own rope, but hopefully I've helped too.

Thursday, October 23, 2008

The price of babies

What is it about having babies that makes people lose all their critical faculties? There seems to be more nonsense spouted - and sold - relating to pregnancy, babies and children than pretty much anything else. Maybe I'm biased, Mrs Norbury is after all almost due to drop Mini Norbury so I've been exposed to a fair bit recently. It's very serious sometimes, especially when people think there are conflicting messages coming to them from science about stuff like vaccinations, or when they actually believe homeopathy can cure anything at all and so give a sick child magic water instead of medicine. However there is also a less serious side to getting people's brains to melt.
Selling you stuff you don't need, or selling you stuff which is like the stuff you need but that bit more expensive is particularly common.
Have a look at this cot mattress for example. That's right, £135 for a cot mattress you'll use for maybe a year or two. Where do you draw the line of more money than sense? I also think it's brilliant that they're describing it as non-allergenic. It's made of latex. There are many people in this world who are sensitive to latex and will develop dermatitis as soon as look at the stuff.  One of the ways you can develop dermatitis in the first place is through repeated contact with a substance, such as latex. I'm not sure if this counts as an allergy, but it's pretty unpleasant and can be very serious.
I must admit though, like all prospective parents I've bought some stuff which I probably won't need and which was probably too expensive, so I don't have much room to criticise those who do buy this kind of thing.
But £135 for a cot mattress? Jesus.

And don't get me started on the whole "Your children are precious so you must buy the best stuff you can for them" line of thought. Which cynical advertiser* came up with that meme?

*see Bill Hicks for why this is an insult.

Thursday, September 11, 2008

Cancer pill peddler convicted

Andrew Harris from Sale has been convicted of selling fake cancer pills. This is definitely Good News. The sentence is fairly soft (two year conditional discharge) but I think that's probably to be expected given a first offence and the limited damage he's actually done. I for one will be watching his website to see if he starts selling again. ( Further coverage is given by the quackometer, who have been following this case from the start.
I doubt there are many people reading this who haven't had some contact with cancer, and although science has made lots of progress in treating and even curing cancer (e.g. Lance Armstrong) it can still be a devastating disease. Andrew Harris was buying herbal pills which normally sell at £20 a bottle, promoting them as a cure for cancer without the slightest bit of evidence, and selling them for £250 a bottle. This is blatant preying on the vulnerable, and is the reason the Cancer Act exists.
The Cancer Act 1939 was enacted to prevent quacks exploiting sick people's natural fears. Unfortunately cancer attracts woos and quacks like flies. From bizarre claims - such as "The key is Prevention. It only cost $1. a day worth of minerals to prevent all forms of cancer. What is needed is a form of insurance that would educate people to use minerals and so give people who take vitamins a lower premium for staying healthy. " (from - serious woo alert!) to blatant criminal fraudsters such as Andrew Harris trying to make a quick buck from other people's misery, cancer attracts them all. The Cancer Act does not have particularly sharp teeth with the maximum sentence being 3 months in prison for a second offence. I don't think this is too soft myself - he's not causing that much damage however despicable his actions - but I would like to see his assets being examined and any profits he's made from triamazon confiscated. I don't know if that's possible, but I'd welcome it. Remove the profits and the fraudsters will not find it worth their while.
For more examples of dietary supplements sold as cancer cures see jdc's blog.

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Ayurvedic Poisoning

There is a report in today's Grauniad about heavy metal contamination found in Ayurvedic medicines. This is not a huge surprise, there have been all sorts of things found in herbal and Ayurvedic medicine in the past.
Lead, mercury and arsenic, as found, are metals well known to be poisonous to pretty much everyone. Of course the dose makes the poison, which is why it can be safe to have mercury in your fillings and in vaccines. The crucial thing is exposure over a length of time. The difference with Ayurvedic medicine is that there is no label, no quality control, and no doctor or health professional capable of deciding when you've had enough because the basic analysis of what's in the stuff hasn't been done at the start. All there is really is a blind faith that because Ayurvedic medicine is ancient it must be good.
Our ancestors might not have known that lead poisoned you, so a lot more people developed lead poisoning than do now. There is something called progress, it's real, it brings benefits including better health for the whole population. For example you can't install lead piping for drinking water any more. Or use lead in paint, or petrol. These things benefit everyone whether they believe them or not.
So why ignore 2500 years of western science and progress? The way of thinking that the ancient Greeks gave us is so much more powerful than any number of supposedly ancient oriental mystical traditions and it is also very old. It's also come on a long way in the last couple of thousand years, but I think I'm going to start referring to science as part of a tradition stretching back to the ancient (Very) Near East. Maybe that'll give it more weight in some people's eyes.
Who's with me in taking the Ionian Way?

Friday, August 22, 2008

How to make women more productive

This is a scanned copy of an 2007 article from Savvy & Sage magazine. I'm sure they won't mind me reproducing it as it is essentially a copy of a 1943 article from another magazine. I think it's safe to say we've come a long way from 1943...

(Click on image for full size)

Monday, August 18, 2008

More Idiocy From Chiropractors

It was revealed this week that the UK chiropractic organisation is following the idiocy of its antipodean counterpart in suing its critics. This is a nice follow on from my first blogpost. I'm not really going to write a lot on this as I'm very late to the party, instead I shall just add my voice to the chorus of support for Simon Singh.

Excellent blogposts can be found listed and summarised along with some detailed background on Holford Watch here (also an excellent site for debunking media nutritionist Patrick Holford, as the name suggests). I encourage you to read up on this.

Homeopathic feebleness

Homeopathy is one of those therapies which rightly attracts ridicule from those who research what it actually involves. This is not the post to examine why, I just want to mock a pathetic attempts by a homeopath to bolster their position.
One of the arguments which some homeopaths advance to 'support' their cause is that some famous people use homeopathy. Quite a few famous people are also clearly idiots, so why this line of argument should be treated as persuasive is beyond me. However the argument quite often fails to even get off the ground to start with. Here is a blog post by Sue Young, Homeopath.
Sue Young is one of the homeopaths who likes to try to claim the support of famous people for homeopathy. She's an ally of Dana Ullman in this. This particular post is particularly weak, she points out that P. G. Wodehouse wrote a short story called 'Homeopathic Treatment'. She doesn't appear to have read the story however, which is unfortunate for her post, in which this is the only evidence of any kind she offers to support her seeming conviction that he was a fan of homeopathy.
Here is the story.
As you may notice if you read it, there isn't actually a single mention of homeopathy. It is based on the homeopathic premise that 'like cures like' (just one of the potty ideas behind homeopathy), but otherwise is a fairly simple story about life in a boys boarding school. It's not one of his better stories either.

Sue Young's site is full of spectacularly weak posts like this. I don't think this is a bad thing though, hopefully the more people who go and read her site with their eyes open the more people will start asking themselves if the evidence for homeopathy itself is as weak as the evidence for her blog-posts. I mean, if that's the best she can do...

Edited to add: I should point out here that I commented on her blogpost long before I wrote this. I didn't keep a copy, but my comment was something like: "Have you read the article you refer to by Wodehouse? I can't find it online anywhere, only the title. Given that he was a humourist it might not have been entirely supportive of homeopathy, obviously it might have been but if you can show me the article then we'll know for sure." She deleted my comment and quite obviously didn't do any more research.

Monday, August 11, 2008

The casual callousness of alternative medicine

In the Independent on Sunday this week (10/08/08) there was a letter from a naturopath called Pat Rattigan. He makes the claim, whilst dismissing the need for vaccination against measles, that:

"There are no cases in recorded medical history of any child, in reasonable health to begin with and with properly managed treatment, being harmed by measles."

I'm not going to examine whether this is true or not, I'm mainly concerned with what it says about the mindset of those who deny the need for and usefulness of measles vaccinations. He is not denying that children die from measles, he is pointing out that it is mainly (he claims only) those children who are most vulnerable who will die from or develop other problems from measles. Is it just me, or is that a chilling statement? To me his statement sounds like 'Well my child is healthy, and coped with a measles infection ok, so screw those kids too  poorly to have a robust immune response.'  This is in other words, survival of the fittest. This is a foundation stone for evolutionary theory, but it's no way to run a modern compassionate society where we protect those who are vulnerable. Maybe you think I'm over-reacting, but put yourself in the shoes of a parent with a chronically ill child reading that sentence.

There is no doubt that measles vaccination has lead to a massive reduction in the number of people contracting measles and also dying of measles.  One of the consequences of a high percentage of children being vaccinated is that a condition called 'herd immunity' develops. This basically means that even if measles is caught by a few people it never becomes epidemic, thus protecting almost all people, including those most vulnerable. I ought to point out here that vulnerable adults can also die from measles.

Not convinced? Here's a graph I prepared from information sourced from the health protection agency. I have plotted together the figures for Measles Notifications and Deaths and the measles vaccination coverage. Because the figures for measles notifications are so much higher than those for deaths they are plotted on the right. The other data is plotted on the left.

I think this data disproves several of the anti-vaxers favourite theories, such as the only improvement in measles being down to improvements in hygiene - there may have been a big improvement when proper sewerage etc. was installed in towns, but the big drop here happens in the 80's, when vaccination rates were soaring. I don't think there was a massive difference in public hygiene from the beginning of the 80's to the end, do you? But as you can see there was a big difference in vaccination rates.

And just as an aside, because it's a whole big blog post on its own, there is no link between MMR and autism. Just in case that was worrying you.

Edited following comment from Gina.

Friday, August 8, 2008

Chiropractors get cross

On the face of it chiropractic is one of the most plausible alternative therapies. Practitioners are regulated by act of parliament, there is even actual evidence that it is more effective than placebo (something which escapes homeopathy and most other alternative therapies). So why has the New Zealand Chiropractors' Association threatened the NZ Medical Journal with legal action?

I think this needs some background. Chiropractic is not based on science, in fact it is based on a rather bizarre set of ideas, principal amongst which is that you can cure many if indeed not all ailments by manipulating the spine. They have some proper evidence that it is more than just placebo - but only for back pain (and possibly headaches, but the evidence is equivocal for that). It isn't really surprising that manipulating the spine could have an effect on back pain. The bad news for chiropractics is that there is no evidence of it working for anything else, and even for back pain it is no more effective than conventional treatment. For these reasons chiropractors are not allowed to call themselves Doctor, at least where this implies they are a medical doctor.

This is law, by the way, at least in the UK and NZ. It appears that a lot of chiropractors in NZ are ignoring this law. The NZ Medical Journal published this article (and another) exposing and excoriating the illegal practice, and the NZ Chiropractors promptly sent a nasty letter. This has been published and rebuffed(pdf) by the esteemed organ with the brilliant soundbite: "let's hear your evidence not your legal muscle".

Could you ask for anything more inspiring to prompt a first blog post?