In Part 1 of this series, I talked about why the basic premise of the acid-alkaline theory is flawed, and I showed that the evidence doesn’t support the idea that a net acid-forming diet is harmful to bone health. Now I want to look at the effect of dietary acid load on other health conditions.
Can the acidity or alkalinity of your diet affect your risk for muscle loss, cancer, and more?
Muscle Wasting
There is some research claiming that acid-forming diets cause muscle wasting, and the proposed mechanism is similar to that of the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis. Some researchers hypothesize that in order to eliminate excess acid and maintain homeostasis, the kidneys must steal amino acids from muscle tissue. (1, 2) Just as a higher acid load increases calcium in the urine, it also increases nitrogen in the urine, leading some to believe that an acid-forming diet causes net nitrogen loss. However, some of these studies neglect to measure nitrogen balance, so this is not necessarily true. (3, 4) In fact, one study showed that a higher acid diet improved nitrogen balance! (5) This theory also does not acknowledge that protein, although it’s acid forming, actually increases the body’s ability to excrete acid. (6) Finally, the one observational study concluding that alkaline diets improve lean muscle mass didn’t even measure the overall acid load of the diet. (7) Instead, they used potassium intake as an approximate measure, and just assumed that the observed improvement in muscle mass was due to the diet being more alkaline. This, in addition to the limitations that always accompany observational data, makes the evidence less than convincing, especially since the clinical trials have conflicting results.
Cancer
One of the more popular claims of the alkaline diet is that it can cure cancer. Proponents say that because cancer can only grow in an acidic environment, a net-alkaline diet can prevent cancer cells from growing, and can eliminate existing cancer cells. This theory is incorrect for a few reasons. First of all, the hypothesis depends on the ability of food to substantially change the pH of the blood and extracellular fluid, which I’ve already shown is not the case. (8, 9, 10) Second, cancer is perfectly capable of growing in an alkaline environment. The pH of normal body tissue is 7.4, which is slightly alkaline, and in almost every experiment done with cancer cells, they are grown in an environment at that pH. (11)
Now, cancer cells do tend to grow better in an acidic environment, but the causality is reversed. Once a tumor develops, it creates its own acidic environment through up-regulated glycolysis and reduced circulation, so the pH of the patient’s blood no longer determines the pH of the cancer. (12) It’s not the acidic environment that causes the cancer; it’s the cancer that causes the acidic environment. To top it all off, the only comprehensive review on ‘diet-induced’ acidosis and cancer did not even acknowledge this as a valid mechanism by which an acid-forming diet could increase cancer risk. They discuss a few biological pathways that could potentially link dietary acid load and cancer, but they admit that it’s mostly speculation and there’s no direct link. (13)
Other Effects
There are a few observational studies attempting to link acid-forming diets with hypertension, but the results are mixed. (14, 15) There’s also limited observational data associating higher acid loads with things like high cholesterol, obesity, and insulin resistance, but there are no proposed mechanisms or clinical studies to validate the hypotheses. (16, 17)
There are a few review papers examining the effect of acid-forming diets and health, but as you’ve seen above, the evidence they have to review is sparse. (18, 19, 20, 21, 22) If you read these papers, you’ll notice that whenever they cite trials showing the deleterious effects of acidosis, those trials were done on patients with chronic kidney disease or diabetes-induced acidosis. In the studies done on healthy people, they’re given ammonium chloride to induce acidosis. What you won’t see are clinical trials showing health consequences from purely ‘diet-induced’ acidosis. (Perhaps because ‘diet-induced’ acidosis doesn’t exist!) You’ll also notice that the strongest two hypotheses deal with osteoporosis and muscle wasting, and that links with other diseases are speculative or based on observational data. And although conflicts of interest don’t necessarily mean their conclusion can’t be trusted, it’s interesting to note that one of these reviews was funded by “pH Sciences®,” which “develops and manufactures patent-protected ingredients that safely and effectively manage biological pH levels.” (23)
In sum, I am not convinced that an acid-forming diet has negative effects on healthy people, based on the science. But just to be sure, it’s always a good idea to observe healthy cultures to see if there’s any anthropological evidence to support or refute the hypothesis.
Like what you’re reading? Get my free newsletter, recipes, eBooks, product recommendations, and more!
Evolutionary Data
There are a few studies where researchers attempted to approximate the net acid load of Paleolithic diets. One estimated that 87% of pre-agricultural people ate net-alkaline diets, and proposed this discrepancy with our modern diets as a possible reason for our declining health. (24) However, a more recent study estimated that only half of the world’s hunter-gatherer societies eat net-alkaline diets, while the other half are net acid-forming. (25) They reason that the other estimate is likely accurate for our earlier ancestors, because their tropical habitat would’ve provided ample fruits and vegetables. This idea is confirmed by another analysis that showed increasing acid load with increasing latitude. (26) Even without the study, it stands to reason that as humans moved into less hospitable environments, the animal content (and acid load) of their diet increased.
Given the subpar clinical science on this topic, I think the evolutionary argument is far more convincing. If half of the world’s hunter-gatherer populations avoid the ‘diseases of civilization’ on an acid-forming diet, it would seem that acid load has little to no bearing on overall health. For some case studies, we can always look to Weston Price’s work to see quite clearly that acid-forming diets are not detrimental to health. Based on Price’s descriptions, many of the traditional diets he studied would have been primarily acid-forming, including the Swiss, the Masai, and the Inuit. Yet despite their high intake of animal foods or grains and their comparatively low intake of fruits and vegetables, they maintained excellent health.
Conclusion
I don’t deny that many people have seen significant health improvements when switching to an alkaline diet, but there are many possible reasons for this not having to do with pH balance. Eating more fresh produce is rarely a bad idea, especially when it displaces nutrient poor processed foods. A person switching to an alkaline diet would significantly reduce their consumption of grains, which could cause dramatic health improvements for somebody with a leaky gut or gluten sensitivity. Dairy would also be minimized, which would help those with dairy sensitivities. And although pure sugar isn’t an acid-forming nutrient, many laypeople claim that it is, so alkaline diets tend to contain far less sugar than a standard Western diet.
Between the scientific evidence (or lack thereof) and the anthropological research, I think we can be confident that the acid load of our diets doesn’t negatively impact healthy people. For those with renal failure or similar conditions that affect kidney function, it’s a different story—there’s certainly room for manipulation of urine pH in the treatment of those conditions. But for someone with functioning kidneys, there should be no concern that an acid-forming diet will harm health.
Better supplementation. Fewer supplements.
Close the nutrient gap to feel and perform your best.
A daily stack of supplements designed to meet your most critical needs.
Sunflower: “Cancer cells….I have been taught over and over again that there is no such thing as a Cancer Cell….like there are dogs and cats and horses….a specie of its own…but only cancerous cell…that is healthy cells that have become cancerous”
There is absolutely such a thing as a cancer cell. Yes, there are dogs, cats and horses, which are all animals. But they all have specific differences just as cancer cells and non-malignant cells may both be cells but they have their specific differences.
Sunflower: “If the environment changes cells will adapt …driven by the need to survive…”
That is not how cancer forms. The vast majority of cancers have been linked to viral infections. The viruses insert their own genetic material in to a healthy cell creating changes such as turning off tumor suppressor genes within the healthy cell.
Ok…if I read this right there are cancer cells…and then you say that viruses enter healthy cells resulting in them becoming cancerous….this is supporting what I said…is it not? It does not matter initially what causes it but the fact that healthy cells become cancerous due to external influences…eg virus…
Sunflower: “Ok…if I read this right there are cancer cells…and then you say that viruses enter healthy cells resulting in them becoming cancerous….this is supporting what I said…is it not? It does not matter initially what causes it but the fact that healthy cells become cancerous due to external influences…eg virus…”
That is not what you said. Here is your quote again:
“If the environment changes cells will adapt …driven by the need to survive….”
It is not the environment that is changing forcing the cells to adapt. It is physical changes within the genes of the cell that are leading to the cancer. These changes are not always from the environment around them.
Cancer cells….I have been taught over and over again that there is no such thing as a Cancer Cell….like there are dogs and cats and horses….a specie of its own…but only cancerous cell…that is healthy cells that have become cancerous. If the environment changes cells will adapt …driven by the need to survive….coming back to the Live Blood Analysis….I agree that many of these so called Blood Analysis people are not trained sufficiently….I can tell you though that I have saved lives by identifying problems before they became symptomatic and was able to refer them to a specialist or even directly to the nearest hospital. It is not about diagnostics but an investigatory service…at all times designed to identify a problem before it takes on the signs of disease…what I call the practice of “PREVENTOLOGY”. and the live blood and dried blood communicates in ways no pathologist will ever know about….here we are talking about the qualitative aspect rather than the quantity of cells within a sample.
James you mentioned Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy….how can this Therapy be of value to cancer patients if cancer feeds on Oxygen?
Sunflower,
Because ALL life on this planet functions within set parameters, exceed either boundary condition, and life ceases. You would die in an excess of oxygen, just as you would from insufficient oxygen. Cancer is no different…
Sunflower: “James you mentioned Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy….how can this Therapy be of value to cancer patients if cancer feeds on Oxygen?”
What I was saying was that hyperbaric may increase the effectiveness of chemotherapy. Should help with radiation therapy as well.
Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) will not cure cancer on its own. This is because cancer cells ARE NOT killed by a high oxygen atmosphere as is often claimed.
Let me explain HBOT first for those not familiar with it. In short oxygen solubility in a liquid, such as blood, increases with increased atmospheric pressure. Therefore, in HBOT the patient is placed in a chamber where they are subjected to increased atmospheric pressure while being given 100% oxygen. This supersaturates the tissues with oxygen.
Most chemotherapy drugs as well as radiation therapy have extremely low success rates in the treatment of cancers. The reason is that the chemo drugs and radiation therapy are both reliant on the formation of oxygen radicals to kill the cancer cells. Due to the poor vascular arrangement within the tumors though there are hypoxic regions that make the chemo and radiation therapy worthless in these regions. Therefore, these areas of the tumor survive and the tumor grows back.
By combining HBOT with these therapies the HBOT would force oxygen in to the previously hypoxic regions of the tumor giving chemo and radiation therapies some significant response.
There ya have it folks. Yet, another money grabbing treatment. Soon this will be required by law as well. For those who don’t know….In most states in the U.S. it is illegal for a doctor to treat your cancer with anything other than Chemo, radiation, or surgery.
Joseph Mahoney: “There ya have it folks. Yet, another money grabbing treatment. Soon this will be required by law as well. ”
You said you were leaving how many times Joseph, yet here you are still are whining. I guess you cannot tell the truth about much of anything.
Tell me Joseph, if you get all banged up in a serious auto accident are you going to whine like this when the ambulance comes to pick you up? “Oh, here comes the ambulance to give me more money grabbing treatments then take me to the hospital for even more money grabbing treatments so I can survive”.
HBOT has been around for a very long time and has its purposes. I first heard about HBOT back when I took up scuba diving 37 years ago. Back in those days its main use was for treating life threatening diver injuries. Since then it has been found to help with carbon monoxide poisoning, healing burns and certain infections that cannot be treated successfully with antibiotics, central retinal arterial occlusion, crush injuries, skin graft issues, etc. HBOT, which is not that expensive has done a lot of great things and saved many lives without the side effects of pharmaceutical drugs.
James I did know this regarding Hbot…as part of my clinical work here we use Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy.
It has been very effective in treating brain injuries and stroke conditions as well as Autism spectrum etc.
Everything I have learnt over the last 5 years in relation to the blood and tissue is based on one principle: Our bodies are alkaline by design and acidic by function.
I always send my clients to their MD to have their CBC”s done which I then follow up with a live blood analysis….I can actually see when the blood becomes slightly acidic and the impact that has on the RBC’s and WBC”S …now we are not talking about a huge shift in pH but a more subtle change that straight away has an impact on my clients health. The problem I found to be most common is the fact that most people do not have sufficient alkaline reserves to keep the internal pH balanced…this is due to stress, illness…and I know you do not agree diet and lifestyle. A positive change in these areas has seen many of my clients improve their health significantly.
Sunflower: “I always send my clients to their MD to have their CBC”s done which I then follow up with a live blood analysis….I can actually see when the blood becomes slightly acidic and the impact that has on the RBC’s and WBC”S ”
Sounds like you are referring to the live blood cell analysis, which I generally have a big problem with. The problem is that most people using live blood cell analysis have no idea what they are doing or talking about. For example, blood RARELY ever goes acidic yet many people doing live blood cell analysis falsely claim that the blood is acidic if the red blood cells are clumping. I saw another company using live blood cell analysis claiming that the clumping was not from acidity , but a lack of enzymes, which is also false. I discussed this here and give real examples of what causes the clumping of cells:
http://curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1458160#i
Note that one of the reasons is cancer. So what happens when a person has cancer and this is what is causing their red blood cells to clump but they are simply told to alkalize, which will not take care of the underlying problem? Again, the blood RARELY goes acidic, and even if it does this is not what causes the red blood cells to clump as I have seen claimed and people should not be told this myth.
Sunflower: “The problem I found to be most common is the fact that most people do not have sufficient alkaline reserves to keep the internal pH balanced”
As has been stated over and over the body’s primary means of pH balance is respiration, which does not require any “alkaline reserves”. The second primary means of the body maintaining its pH is through dumping hydrogen ions through the kidneys, which again does not require “alkaline reserves”. And there are still other means of pH balancing that does not require “alkaline reserves” so that statement makes no sense. The primary alkaline reserve though produced by the body is sodium bicarbonate, which the body produces sufficient levels of throughout life.
Since respiration is a primary means of pH balance and we breathe throughout life this is why we RARELY ever see true acidosis or alkalosis. And most people’s kidneys function fine allowing the dumping of hydrogen ions through the kidneys as a secondary major backup for pH regulation…… See the pattern? Again, this is why true acidosis or alkalosis are rarely seen. The body has various redundant systems in place to maintain its pH even if we eat like crap all the time.
Every reported case of cancer has begun in an acidic body. Cancer cells thrive in acidic environments and do not like alkaline environments. This second statement cannot be refuted please try and find contrary information. Also, , please everyone do significant research before making your decision on treatments. A slightly alkaline ph is not only healthy it is recommended by doctors! Some of the information in this article is actually harmful and could sway cancer patience from helping create an environment that cancer cells do not like. In my research I found that there has not been a documented case of cancer forming in an alkaline environment. On top of this, foods do influence ph level. They provide sodium bicarbonate in chemotherapy to keep the ph at an alkaline level for lymphoma! Research many articles, journals etc before making any health changes!
Irfhan,
The first course of treatment I would probably pursue MYSELF if I was diagnosed with cancer (and wanted to continue living) would be massive doses of intravenous vitamin C… Ascorbic ACID… please use due diligence when advising others… we have already explained a dozen times that there is no such thing as “body” pH.
Mr. Paleo: “The first course of treatment I would probably pursue MYSELF if I was diagnosed with cancer (and wanted to continue living) would be massive doses of intravenous vitamin C… Ascorbic ACID…”
This is one thing we would disagree on. Synthetic ascorbic acid is very unstable. See:
Actually, we do not disagree… I was simplifying my answer, since cancer does not “thrive” in acidic environments, as you have already pointed out. And yes, I would probably choose chelated forms such as magnesium ascorbate over straight ascorbic acid… as this is recommended in the usual treatment protocol. Intravenous ascorbate becomes an oxidant, and overcomes the rapid elimination that oral route vit. C encounters, which would make it relatively ineffective in this particular situation. Agreed ?
Mr. Paleo: “Actually, we do not disagree… I was simplifying my answer, since cancer does not “thrive” in acidic environments, as you have already pointed out. ”
I agree with that. What I was referring to was the comment “if I was diagnosed with cancer (and wanted to continue living) would be massive doses of intravenous vitamin C”. Massive doses of vitamin C will not cure cancer. Just look at Linus Pauling who advocated massive doses of vitamin C and still died from cancer. The body cannot utilize such high levels of vitamin C, and again in an IV solution most of the ascorbic acid will have decomposed in to oxalic acid long before it can be infused in to the body. This is also why I think IV ascorbic acid is a waste of time and money.
And yes you are right that high doses of ascorbic acid, IV or oral, are not antioxidant but rather pro-oxidant.
Magnesium ascorbate is not a chelate. Chelates are minerals bound to amino acids. But mineral ascorbates are easier on the body for most people since the acidity of the ascorbic acid has been buffered. Although I have never seen anything on their stability compared to straight ascorbic acid and have never tested the stability.
I still prefer to get my vitamin C from natural sources such as foods or herbs. Natural vitamin C sources tend to be much more stable and stronger than synthetic vitamin C. An exception is camu camu, which is also very unstable.
Vitamin C should not be relied on as a sole means of cancer treatment regardless. Vitamin C will boost the immune system because it helps boost white blood cell activity. Problem is that the white blood cells known as natural killer (NK) cells must first be able to detect the cancer cells before they can destroy the cancer cells. But cancer cells have developed the ability to evade immune detection pretty well, which is why the cancers are not destroyed at their earliest stages. Along that same line, it is a myth that we all have cancer cells and the immune system simply destroys them normally before they can take hold. These people are confusing cancer cells with other rapidly dividing, but non-malignant cells. Cancer cells have specific traits that set them apart from most other rapidly dividing cells.
James,
Several times I have requested that we take our conversation “off-site”, since it really isn’t directly relevant to the original topic of discussion, and really isn’t fair to Chris…
Since you have not agreed, I have no choice but to answer you here…
1) Massive doses of parenteral vitamin C administered sequentially over an extended period of time have been shown to “eliminate” several forms of cancerous growth…
2) Linus Pauling’s death proves nothing, since he used the ORAL administration route…
3)“There’s been a bias since the late 1970s that vitamin C cancer treatment is worthless and a waste of time,” said Dr. Jeanne Drisko, a study co-author and the director of integrative medicine at the University of Kansas Medical Center. “We’re overcoming that old bias.”
“When high concentrations of ascorbate entered the space between cells, it formed hydrogen peroxide.”
Senior author Qi Chen, an assistant professor of pharmacology, toxicology and therapeutics at the University of Kansas, said the hydrogen peroxide went to work on cancerous cells in several ways: It damaged their DNA, it stressed their metabolism and inhibited their growth. Surprisingly, the hydrogen peroxide did not harm the non-cancerous cells, researchers found. While they said it remains unclear exactly why this is the case, they suspect it has to do with the inefficient way cancer cells convert glucose to energy, when compared with regular cells…
“Ascorbate causes an energy crisis for the cancer cells,” Chen said.
4) Apparently you were educated in the 70’s or later, because originally, the term “chelated” referred to any mineral attached to an organic compound. It was in the late 60’s or early 70’s that “amino acid chelation” became all the rage, and hence your thinking that it has to be an “amino acid” complex.
“Magnesium chelate” is slightly ambiguous, but chelated “magnesium ion” means a magnesium ion that is bonded by at least two coordinate covalent bonds to a single molecule, usually an organic molecule with two functional groups… with amino acids, this would be a “ring” molecule. If you don’t believe me, check out current soil science references…
And, I stand by my assertion that given the choice between radiation and chemotherapy, and vitamin C/HBOT, I still choose the latter… read my blog, as this is REAL personal to me…
MR PALEO: “1) Massive doses of parenteral vitamin C administered sequentially over an extended period of time have been shown to “eliminate” several forms of cancerous growth…”
Any studies to show this? I am very leery about people claiming such things without providing any real evidence. For example, there is a guy on Curezone pushing “oleander soup” for cancer even though it has been proven ineffective over and over. He even misinterprets the studies to make it sound like oleander works when this is not the case. The last study he tried to quote was only a safety study that he claimed proved oleander worked for cancer. This is not what the study showed though. In fact, the study showed that the people who were in the study died in a shorter time than they were estimated to have without the treatment. Because of people pulling crap like that on unsuspecting victims I like to see the evidence to such claims so I can review how the study was done and the person is interpreting those studies.
MR PALEO: “2) Linus Pauling’s death proves nothing, since he used the ORAL administration route…”
So where are the studies showing that IV ascorbic acid is somehow utilized by the body in a different manner than orally ingested ascorbic acid?
The only difference I can see would be in the fact that the IV ascorbic acid would mostly decompose in to oxalic acid long before it can be infused as previously pointed out.
MR PALEO: ““When high concentrations of ascorbate entered the space between cells, it formed hydrogen peroxide.””
Again questionable. The body does form hydrogen peroxide, but this is formed from the antioxidant enzyme superoxide dismutase (SOD). SOD is not in the space between the cells though, but rather is inside the cells. So I would like to see the mechanism by which mineral ascorbates in the extracellular space is supposed to stimulate SOD to form hydrogen peroxide.
This also brings up the question as to if this is true was it the mineral or the ascorbic acid stimulating the hydrogen peroxide formation?
MR PALEO: “Senior author Qi Chen, an assistant professor of pharmacology, toxicology and therapeutics at the University of Kansas, said the hydrogen peroxide went to work on cancerous cells in several ways: It damaged their DNA, it stressed their metabolism and inhibited their growth. Surprisingly, the hydrogen peroxide did not harm the non-cancerous cells, researchers found. While they said it remains unclear exactly why this is the case, they suspect it has to do with the inefficient way cancer cells convert glucose to energy, when compared with regular cells…”
How old and outdated is this information? I have known how hydrogen peroxide selectively attacks cancer cells without harming healthy cells for about 20 years. It’s actually pretty common knowledge. All some researcher has to do is look up how natural killer (NK) cells destroy cancer cells when they are capable of detecting them. The NK cells attach to the cancer cells and inject peroxide in to the cancer cell causing the cancer cell to swell and burst. This is also the main mechanism by which ozone therapy works. Unlike healthy cells, cancer cells lack sufficient levels of antioxidant enzymes such as catalase, peroxidases and SOD that also happens to break down peroxide. These enzymes protect healthy cells by breaking down the peroxides in to water and oxygen. Since cancer cells are deficient in these enzymes they cannot tolerate the peroxide load and therefore are destroyed by the peroxide.
Peroxide also helps activate white blood cells. For example, during a viral infection interferon is released that among other things stimulates SOD to form peroxide, which in turn activates white blood cells.
None of this has anything to do with the “way cancer cells convert glucose to energy”.
MR PALEO: “4) Apparently you were educated in the 70′s or later, because originally, the term “chelated” referred to any mineral attached to an organic compound. ”
I stick to updated terms. For example, I don’t use the term adrenaline since this is an outdated term. I use epinephrine, which is the current term used and use “adrenaline” in parentheses for those not familiar with the current term.
Regardless, what you are describing is not an outdated term. You are just using it in the wrong context. What you are referring to is the current definition in chemistry. We are talking about the holistic health field though in which the definition is more narrowed and refers to a mineral bound to an amino acid.
The terms you use should be consistent with the topic. For example, the term electrolysis is not the same in chemistry as it is on cosmetology.
MR PALEO: “And, I stand by my assertion that given the choice between radiation and chemotherapy, and vitamin C/HBOT, I still choose the latter…”
Fine that is your choice. I would NEVER do chemo or radiation either, but if I needed a cancer therapy I would go with something proven such as ozone therapy or herbs proven to work by research, not hearsay.
As I mentioned earlier one of the main functions of ozone in the destruction of cancer cells is peroxide formation. Bot the lipid peroxide and hydrogen peroxide formed by the reaction of ozone on lipids and water respectively will selectively destroy cancer cells on contact. See:
http://www.medcapsules.com/info/The%20Chemistry%20of%20Ozone%20Therapy%20on%20Cancer.htm
James, Apparently, you missed my statement that I don’t feel it is appropriate to have this discussion here…
My last remark, Linus Pauling died at the age of 93 from a cancer that even by today’s standards is considered UNTREATABLE… please read “Vitamin C, The Real Story” by Drs. Levy & Saul, “Primal Panacea” by Dr. Levy, and everything by Drs. Hickey and Roberts.
I’m done.
Mr Paleo: “Apparently, you missed my statement that I don’t feel it is appropriate to have this discussion here…”
No, I did not miss it. You are entitled to your opinion but I disagree. Furthermore, if Chris has a problem with the discussion he would not approve the messages. So as long as he is fine with the discussion here I am as well.
I asked for evidence to back your claims that the IV vitamin C worked for cancer and that taking the vitamin C orally somehow is used differently by the body than IV vitamin C. Giving me a list of books to read that may or may not provide the research to back these points is not providing evidence to your claims.
Mr Paleo: “Linus Pauling died at the age of 93 from a cancer that even by today’s standards is considered UNTREATABLE…”
I don’t consider any cancer untreatable until the person is dead. Ozone for one can be highly effective in reversing cancer, even in late stages. The biggest danger is killing the cancer cells too quick, which can potentially cause sepsis if the immune system is overwhelmed. Otherwise it is the safest and most effective cancer therapy I have ever found when performed properly.
Ozone therapy has been around since 1898, and therefore was in existence when Pauling died of cancer.
You are also overlooking another simple fact. If high dose vitamin C is so effective against cancer then how did Pauling get cancer in the first place? After all the cancer did not pop up suddenly as a stage 4 cancer. It had to grow from a single malignant cell. By standards back then and by today’s standards early stage cancers are still considered curable. So why did his megadosing of vitamin C fail to prevent the initiation of cancer and fail to halt Pauling’s cancer even in its earliest stages?
Irfhan: “Every reported case of cancer has begun in an acidic body.”
Not even close to being true. Especially considering the fact that the body RARELY ever goes acidic since the blood must be maintained with a very narrow range to prevent death from acidosis or the more dangerous alkalosis.
Irfhan: “Cancer cells thrive in acidic environments and do not like alkaline environments. This second statement cannot be refuted please try and find contrary information.
This myth has already been addressed over and over. Cancer cells have an internal pH more alkaline than healthy cells because they are killed by acidity.:
Vacuolar H(+)-ATPase in Cancer Cells: Structure and Function. Atlas of Genetics and Cytogenetics in Oncology and Haematology Sept. 2011
Vacuolar H_-ATPase in human breast cancer cells with distinct metastatic potential: distribution and functional activity. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 286: C1443–C1452, 2004
To protect themselves from the acidity they export the acidic hydrogen ions in to the external matrix to maintain their alkalinity. If their proton pumps are blocked the cancer cells become acidic and are killed:
Targeting vacuolar H+-ATPases as a new strategy against cancer. Cancer Res 2007 Nov 15;67(22):10627-30
Vacuolar H(+)-ATPase signaling pathway in cancer. Curr Protein Pept Sci 2012 Mar;13(2):152-63
Even though cancer cells derive at least 50% of their energy through oxidative phosphorylation:
Oxygen Consumption Can Regulate the Growth of Tumors, a New Perspective on the Warburg Effect. PLoS One 2009 Sep 15;4(9):e7033
Choosing between glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation: a tumor’s dilemma? Biochim Biophys Acta 2011 Jun;1807(6):552-61
the high alkalinity of cancer cells increases the cancer cells reliance on glycolysis.:
Role of the Intracellular pH in the Metabolic Switch between Oxidative Phosphorylation and Aerobic Glycolysis-Relevance to Cancer. Cancer 2011;2(3):WMC001716
Cancer cells are not only more alkaline than healthy cells, but research has shown that excess alkalinity of healthy cells can morph them in to cancer cells:
Na+/H+ exchanger-dependent intracellular alkalinization is an early event in malignant transformation and plays an essential role in the development of subsequent transformation-associated phenotypes. FASEBJ 2000 Nov;14(14):2185-97
Tumorigenic 3T3 cells maintain an alkaline intracellular pH under physiological conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990 October; 87(19): 7414–7418
31P NMR analysis of intracellular pH of Swiss Mouse 3T3 cells: effects of extracellular Na+ and K+ and mitogenic stimulation. J Membr Biol 1986;94(1):55-64
Extracellular Na+ and initiation of DNA synthesis: role of intracellular pH and K+. J Cell Biol 1984 Mar;98(3):1082-9
Irfhan: “In my research I found that there has not been a documented case of cancer forming in an alkaline environment”
Well, now you have seen the real research proving your claims are wrong. All cancerous tumors have highly alkaline internal pH levels.
Irfhan: “On top of this, foods do influence ph level.”
Again, pH levels are primarily regulated by respiration and dumping of hydrogen ions through the kidneys, not diet.
Irfhan: “They provide sodium bicarbonate in chemotherapy to keep the ph at an alkaline level for lymphoma!”
Yes, do the research. IV sodium bicarbonate therapy can induce acidosis very easily since a byproduct of sodium bicarbonate neutralizing acid is carbonic ACID!!!
All normal cells have an absolute requirement for oxygen, but cancer cells can live without oxygen – a rule without exception. – Dr. Otto Warburg
Sunflower,
As with John R. you need to catch up to modern research. Warburg’s hypotheses about oxygen utilization by cancer cells and energy production by cancer cells were disproven decades ago.
Yes please Sunflower,
Do jump on the bandwagon to the new manipulated research statistics paid for by multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical companies, and -or- a government and FDA that authorizes a huge increase % on pesticide use.. like we didn’t have enough cancer. Oh wait..they must need more money! Just sayin …
Dr. Otto Warburg received 46 Nobel Prize nominations over a period of 9 years, including 13 nominations in 1931, the year he won it.
How many Nobel nominations has Mr. Kresser had?
All depends on who you accept as the authority.
John R,
It does not matter how many Nobel Prize nominations Warburg got for several reasons.
First of all Warburg’s receipt of the Nobel Prize was for the discovery of an enzyme he called “iron oxidase”. It was not for anything having to do with the subject here of pH. So you can use the same argument on any off topic subject, such as what is the healthiest ice cream to buy and it would mean just as much.
Secondly, Warburg’s hypotheses about how cancer cells utilize oxygen and derive energy were later disproven by a number of scientists. Part of the reason for this is that Warburg was guessing on these claims. That is why they were hypotheses and not theories. In addition, the technology did not exist in his day to confirm things such as the high oxygen utilization by cancer cells or the highly alkaline pH of cancer cells.
This is why research is always continuing. If we would have accepted everything learned about science and medicine discovered by the early 1900s as fact and halted all research assuming that everything that can be learned has already been learned we would still be stuck with early 1900s technology and thought.
Luckily we have a piece of MODERN technology called the internet that makes it much easier for people to look up modern research and see what has been been learned and verified since the early 1900s. That is if they wish to catch up on the modern age as opposed to holding on to old beliefs such as the world is flat and you can sail off the edge of the Earth.
Actually all 3 of you need to give it a rest already!
Dear Julie,
Please leave me out of this… and skip the judgment… you don’t know me, or what I do, or what I am about… try actually READING my blog which, unlike the others, I have proffered…
James,
‘Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.’ — George Carlin
@Mr Paleo
No, I will certainly not be reading your blog! I’ll stop judging you when you stop hijacking Chris’s site, promoting yourself, and riding on his coat tails.
sigh… has it even occurred to you that being that this IS Chris’s site, he could easily block myself, or James, or anyone else for that matter, including you, from commenting ???
Sorry I meant James and Joseph
It does not matter who you meant. Clearly you don’t care that people get the proper information to stay safe and remain healthy as we do.
I for one though do care that people get the proper health information. If someone posts bogus health information like telling someone that if they hop on one foot while spinning counter-clockwise and chewing on sugar free gum that they can cure their stage 4 cancer I am going to call them on the BS. Why? Because unlike you I care that people remain safe and get the proper information to make sure they stay safe and healthy.
Furthermore, NOBODY is forcing you to read this blog or any of the comments. If you don’t like it then don’t read the comments. You are not the all high an mighty speaking for the rest of the world. There are other people reading this blog and its comments because they do care about the truth and are seeking proper health information.
So get over yourself, you are not more important than everyone else like you think you are.
@ James and Mr Paleo
Will the two of you give it a rest please! Both of you want to have the last say, and no one is interested except your egos!
To: Sunflower,
Emotional statements like “consuming meat makes one violent” is absolute scientific nonsense… and has no historical or factual basis…
And while you may, or may not be healthy, 90% of my “clients” are female, and at least 70% are/were vegan or vegetarian… and almost all are VERY sick…
I have addressed most of the irrational arguments for being vegan/vegetarian on my blog…
http://www.misterpaleo.blogspot.com
By the way, I said MAY lead to violence ……Non-violence and vegetarianism have a long history together — perhaps best articulated by Leo Tolstoy’s observation that “As long as there are slaughterhouses there will be battlefields”. At the most basic level, the killing of another animal is, just like the killing of another human, an inherently violent act.
For theoretical discussion of the links between meat consumption and violence see, for example: Patterson, Mathew. 2001. Understanding Global Environmental Politics: Domination, Accumulation, Resistance. Palgrave Macmillan
The consumption of animal products in general, and meat eating specifically, is certainly not the only or even necessarily a primary cause of human conflict and violence. It is self-evident, however, that meat eating is inherently violent and there is strong evidence that the environmental degradation it fuels sometimes contributes to human on human violence
James the body “tries” to maintian is what you mean. Yes of course it’s saliva or urine…bit of “duh” factor there. With that said, Let me know of “any” cancer patient that had a blood ph of 7.4 or higher. Chances are you will find 0. People with cancer that I know of had acidic blood pH. But while the doctors are pumping the patient full of chemotherapy,acidic foods, and presciptions that poison, followed by radiation and surgery, they are ignoring the fact that cancer thrives in a low oxygen environment. Oxygen cannot stick to blood cells if the pH of the blood is acidic. And rather than do everything that they can to raise the pH back up to a normal pH of 7.4 so that the blood can function properly, they prefer surgery.Agian I ask, How does the body maintain a blood ph level of 7.4 when urine,saliva, and everything you put into your body is acidic? It’s simple, It doesn’t! Blood level ph decreases and you are prone to disease, infections, etc.Yes, if your body does not recover from the drop in blood ph, you will die. However, as soon as the body does get the food it needs to do so, it instantly works at raising the blood ph level. Oh, but what about those bad cells,diseases coming in,other illnesses, they will have to wait because the body is busy controlling blood ph and is lacking healthy food.
Joseph Mahoney: “James the body “tries” to maintian is what you mean.”
No Joseph, it “DOES”. If it didn’t we would be DEAD. The body can only live with a very narrow pH range of the blood. This is why the body very effectively maintains that very narrow pH range except in very rare conditions. Even at that being very slightly acidic or alkaline is harmful but not deadly. As I pointed out though it does not take much of a shift out of normal to induce death. This is why the body has so many redundant systems to tightly maintain its blood pH.
Joseph Mahoney: “Yes of course it’s saliva or urine…bit of “duh” factor there.”
Which once again DOES NOT reflect blood pH, which is what has been being discussed. If we were discussing cars I would not expect you to start discussing your peddle tricycle. So why do you want to keep discussing salivary and urinary pH when they do not reflect on blood pH that everyone else is discussing in relation to health?
Joseph Mahoney: “Let me know of “any” cancer patient that had a blood ph of 7.4 or higher.”
Again, why are you bringing up something that was never claimed?
Joseph Mahoney: eople with cancer that I know of had acidic blood pH.
Obviously you were not measuring their blood pH. Cancerous tumors will make an acidic microenvironment around the tumor. But this DOES NOT make all the blood acidic. Again, if it did the person would die of acidosis.
Your comment is also contradictory of the other bogus claims being made by the alkaline supporters who keep claiming bones are frequently used to buffer acidity. According to the hypothesis combined with your bogus claim, if the blood was actually acidic from the cancer then the bones would quickly dissolve away in an attempt to buffer the acidic blood. Therefore, a cancer patient, especially with late stage cancer would have no skeletal system as all the bone minerals would have been used to buffer the acidity. See how ridiculous your claim is?
Bones can be used as a buffering agent for acidosis, but this is only used by the body as a very last resort. Respiration is still the body’s main means of pH balance followed by hydrogen ion dumping through the kidneys. And the body still has various other means to maintain its pH.
Please stop repeating the same bogus information that has already been addressed and proven wrong.
Joseph Mahoney: “they are ignoring the fact that cancer thrives in a low oxygen environment.”
This myth was disproven decades ago and again has already been addressed. Cancer cells grow faster when they have a sufficient supply of oxygen. That is the purpose of angiogenesis is malignant tumors. Do the research from credible sites, not propaganda and sales sites!!!
Cancer cells derive at least 50% of their energy production through oxidative phosphorylation (OxPhos), which by the name should tell you requires sufficient oxygen. Cancer cells have also been shown to have a higher affinity for oxygen than healthy cells because they are so reliant on oxygen for survival and proliferation.
Joseph Mahoney: “Oxygen cannot stick to blood cells if the pH of the blood is acidic.”
Again, you have no clue how the body works. Research how oxygen is released from hemoglobin to tissues. The tissues must be slightly ACIDIC for the oxygen to release from the blood. If the blood is too alkaline this not only decreases circulation through vasoconstriction, but also inhibits the oxygen release from hemoglobin leading to tissue hypoxia (low oxygen). The hypoxia leads to a build up of carbonic acid that restores circulation and allows the cells to receive the oxygen from the hemoglobin.
Joseph Mahoney: “How does the body maintain a blood ph level of 7.4 when urine,saliva, and everything you put into your body is acidic?”
Really?!!! First of all I don’t put urine in to my body. I excrete it and leave it excreted. Secondly, urinary pH can vary from acidic to alkaline and saliva has an alkaline pH. What makes salivary pH reading acidic are the flora acids in the mouth. Again, the saliva itself is alkaline.
It is true that all foods will eventually metabolize in to acids. most of these are essential to and utilized by the body. The rest is either neutralized or eliminated from the body through the body’s numerous pH regulation methods. This really should not be that difficult of a concept to grasp for you.
Joseph Mahoney: “Blood level ph decreases and you are prone to disease, infections, etc.”
Again, the body maintains a very tight control on its pH so acidosis, as well as the more dangerous alkalosis are both EXTREMELY rare. Although, it has been shown that most pathogens thrive in an alkaline environment. For example, the Candida growth gene is turned on and Candida morphs in to its pathogenic fungal form in an alkaline environment. Bacteria causing urinary tract infections secrete an enzyme to split urea in to highly alkaline ammonia to protect themselves from acidic urine. The ulcer and cancer causing Helicobacter pylori bacteria secrete highly alkaline ammonia to protect itself from stomach acid…….. One role our stomach acid is to kill ingested pathogens. The flora that inhabit various parts of our body also secrete acids that have one role of killing pathogens, and controlling Candida. Cancer cells maintain an alkaline internal pH to allow them to survive and thrive. If their internal pH becomes too acidic the cancer cells die. Studies have also shown that if the internal pH of a healthy cell becomes too alkaline the healthy cell will morph in to a cancer cell.
By the way, try looking up what happens to a person if they build up too much ammonia in their system, which is highly alkaline. Then stop repeating the acidity causes disease myth.
Joseph Mahoney: “However, as soon as the body does get the food it needs to do so, it instantly works at raising the blood ph level.”
You are finally getting closer to the truth. “Instantly”? No. When the food goes through its primary digestion in the stomach the mix is known as chyme. As the acidic chyme is released in to intestines the pancreas releases alkaline sodium bicarbonate to neutralize the acid in the chyme to protect the intestines. This is the so-called “alkaline response” and it occurs with ALL foods, even junk foods.
This takes time though, it is not “instantly” as you incorrectly claimed.
You continue to add a whole lot of information that is not required…My ending note, your claim is rediculous. Cancer cells and high oxygen levels..Ha! Not a chance..but whatever. My guess, your in the pharmaceutical industry or similar. Good day sir. People, get some litmus paper its $4 and I dont sell them, keep records, and see how you feel accordingly. There is your truth.
Joseph Mahoney: “My ending note, your claim is rediculous. Cancer cells and high oxygen levels..Ha! Not a chance..but whatever. ”
I guess some people need to learn the hard way:
On the use of oxygen through oxidative phosphorylation by cancer cells:
Oxygen Consumption Can Regulate the Growth of Tumors, a New Perspective on the Warburg Effect. PLoS One 2009 Sep 15;4(9):e7033
Choosing between glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation: a tumor’s dilemma? Biochim Biophys Acta 2011 Jun;1807(6):552-61
On the fact that low oxygen levels slow cancer growth and an absence of oxygen kills cancer cells:
Oxygen consumption can regulate the growth of tumors, a new perspective on the Warburg effect. PLoS One 2009 Sep 15;4(9):e7033
Anoxia is necessary for tumor cell toxicity caused by a low-oxygen environment. Cancer Res 2005 Apr 15;65(8):3171-8
Relationship between oxygen and glucose consumption by transplanted tumors in vivo. Cancer Res 1967 Jun;27(6):1041-52
On the fact that acidity is required to release oxygen from hemoglobin:
Biochemistry, Mary Campbell, Ph.D. and Shawn Farrell, Ph.D. 2005
Regulatory mechanisms of hemoglobin oxygen affinity in acidosis and alkalosis. J Clin Invest 1971 March; 50(3): 700–706
Hematology in clinical practice: a guide to diagnosis and management Robert S. Hillman, Kenneth A. Ault, Henry M. Rinder 2002
On cancer cells having a more alkaline internal pH than healthy cells:
Vacuolar H(+)-ATPase in Cancer Cells: Structure and Function. Atlas of Genetics and Cytogenetics in Oncology and Haematology Sept. 2011
Vacuolar H_-ATPase in human breast cancer cells with distinct metastatic potential: distribution and functional activity. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 286: C1443–C1452, 2004
And on a build up of internal acidity causing cancer cell death:
Targeting vacuolar H+-ATPases as a new strategy against cancer. Cancer Res 2007 Nov 15;67(22):10627-30
Vacuolar H(+)-ATPase signaling pathway in cancer. Curr Protein Pept Sci 2012 Mar;13(2):152-63
On high alkalinity morphing healthy cells in to malignant cells:
Na+/H+ exchanger-dependent intracellular alkalinization is an early event in malignant transformation and plays an essential role in the development of subsequent transformation-associated phenotypes. FASEBJ 2000 Nov;14(14):2185-97
Tumorigenic 3T3 cells maintain an alkaline intracellular pH under physiological conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990 October; 87(19): 7414–7418
On the higher affinity for oxygen by cancer cells than normal cells:
Utilization of Oxygen by Transplanted Tumors in Vivo. Cancer Res 1967;27:1020-1030
Growth-related changes of oxygen consumption rates of tumor cells grown in vitro and in vivo. J Cell Physiol 1989 Jan;138(1):183-91
On the fact that cancer cells produce a vascular network to increase oxygen levels they need to survive and thrive:
Computational models of VEGF-associated angiogenic processes in cancer. Math Med Biol 2012 Mar;29(1):85-94
Blood Flow, Oxygen Consumption, and Tissue Oxygenation of Human Breast Cancer Xenografts in Nude Rats. Cancer Res 47, 3496-3503, July 1,1987
A Mathematical Model for the Diffusion of Tumour Angiogenesis Factor into the Surrounding Host. Tissue Math Med Biol (1991) 8 (3): 191-220
The History of Tumour Angiogenesis as a Therapeutic Target. University of Toronto Medical Journal Vol 87, No 1 (2009)
Now, you cannot tell us that all these researchers who have actually done the research are wrong and you, who has not done any real research is the only one that is right.
As for your comment that I am in the pharmaceutical industry or something similar you are just as wrong. I have been working in holistic medicine for 23 years. So stop assuming everything and try posting some real facts by actually researching what you are talking about from credible sources, not the propaganda sites you have been your bogus information from.
Once again James posts what could be and more than likely, a bunch of manipulated test results, bla bla bla. Nobody will know unless you were standing right there doing it yourself. Even taking the word of many year professionals now a days wouldn’t be truthful. Anyone wanting to see those facts. Look up a Drs, Mark Hyman and Mark Liponis. They wrote an article back in 2001 that will knock your socks off. As far as making asumptions..I will do so at my free will…your continued posts of such nature for a man with so much experience,could lead one to assume you are selling something. Do you in fact have a product for sale?
Secondly, a cancer cell is (extremely simple terms here) we both know the complexity of the subject. A cell that has no (or lost) its functionality. The cell is now taking on what I call (it’s right to live) only at the beginning stage does the cell have an alkaline presents (reason for the misguided tests results they can put out) quickly the body tries to kill that now disfunctinal cell forcing it to take on lesser properties (an acidic form doing all kinds of wonderful things..note being sarcastic) believe the false reports if you wish, be one of the millions manipulated by people who want you to believe untruthful statistics. Billions of dollars a year towards research…think about that! No cure since the polio vaccination…really? Only treatments, treatments that have a low success rate mind you. Doesn’t take a whole lot of common sense to figure out something is going on….
You keep saying you are leaving then come back to argue without any evidence to back your claims. And when evidence is presented you claim it “could be” manipulates because you have no other argument to come up with.
And I agree with Mr. Paleo’s suggestion of never argue with an idiot so I am going to drop it. You are never going to accept the truth including cancer cells maintaining their alkalinity throughout their life cycle. So posting evidence to you is just a complete waste of time.
The evidence has been presented though for those who do care about the truth and want to actually do the research and see the facts.
For those who believe James is correct about beverages not changing the bodies ph…test your ph before a night on the town and then test it again the next day 🙂 or when your feeling great and have a cold…etc. etc. Personally, I know when I have a cold coming on by testing my ph. I’ve done it for years. I feel like shit when my ph is low, eat,drink, etc. and a day or so ph levels out, and once again I feel fabulous. So your theory of food and beverage not making a difference…False! Quit reading, buy some litmus paper, and try it for yourself!
If you are using litmus paper then you are either testing your salivary or urinary pH. NEITHER of these reflect blood pH. The ONLY way to determine blood pH is with a blood test. And the body maintains tight control on its blood pH.
If blood ph stays at 7.4 at ALL times. How do you suppose it does that in a body that is always 5.5? It is also a fact you can raise your bodies ph to higher levels for about 10-15 days (without killing you or doing harm) and then allowing it to drop back to around 7-8. Interesting is the fact many made same claims about polio…Oh wait..don’t see polio around much anymore..wonder why? Oh but no cures have been found since that SUCCESSFUL vaccine…. Only treatments and faulty vaccines making particular inviduals and organizations billions a year. James your feb. 15th post is rediculous…you probably believe everything you read on the internet too…. wow! You are manipulated by those who want you to believe that garbage.
Joseph Mahoney: “How do you suppose it does that in a body that is always 5.5?”
If a person has a pH of 5.5 then they would be dead. Coma or death occurs at a blood pH starting at 6.95 and death definitely occurs if the pH drops below 6.8. So you are proving how little you really know about the subject.
Joseph Mahoney: “It is also a fact you can raise your bodies ph to higher levels for about 10-15 days (without killing you or doing harm) and then allowing it to drop back to around 7-8.”
Again you are showing your complete ignorance of the subject. If blood pH exceeds 7.8, which is below a pH of 8 that is the minimum you are talking about letting the pH drop to, death also occurs. When the blood becomes too alkaline the muscles start contracting, which is also why we pass out when we hyperventilate as I mentioned before.
The hyperventilation blows off carbon dioxide decreasing carbonic acid levels leading to alkalosis. This causes the blood vessels to constrict, including those supplying the brain. The loss of blood flow to the brain causes the person to pass out. Respiration then slows or ceases temporarily to build carbonic acid levels back up to restore blood flow to the brain.
This is also why controlled hyperventilation is used to reduce brain swelling. Swelling is the result of over dilation of blood vessels, which makes them permeable and thus allows fluid to leak in to the surrounding tissues. By doing controlled hyperventilation this causes the blood vessels supplying the brain to constrict so they stop leaking fluid, thus reducing the swelling.
If a person over alkalizes their blood, raising the pH above 7.8 the person quickly dies as the muscles of the lung spasm so strongly as to cause the person to suffocate to death.
Therefore, I can care less of what you think of my Feb. 15 post since apparently the only reason you did not like it is because you don’t have a clue how the body works and therefore failed to understand the facts presented.
Not true…really don’t have time for a useless arguement. Again you speak of what you have been taught or read. Similar to Studies, surveys, etc. All of which can be manipulized to get the result your looking for. Facts, the bodies ph level can be raised higher tan youstate for a short period, then loweredto normal…I used an example between 7-8…7.4 is between correct?
Joseph,
I speak on what is fact, not bogus propaganda like you are presenting.
Joseph Mahoney: “Facts, the bodies ph level can be raised higher tan youstate for a short period, then loweredto normal…I used an example between 7-8…7.4 is between correct?”
No, not correct. Here is your quote again:
“It is also a fact you can raise your bodies ph to higher levels for about 10-15 days (without killing you or doing harm) and then allowing it to drop back to around 7-8.”
So you clearly DO NOT state “between 7-8”. You CLEARY state “then allowing it to DROP BACK to around 7-8”. To “drop back” to at least 8 this would require the pH to be above 8 in the first place, which would be deadly even for a short period of time.
By the way, 10-15 days is not a “short time”. I don’t know of a single person on Earth that go without breathing due to having a pH that high for 10-15 days. Do you? Unless you do then your claim of being able to raise the pH that high for that long without harm or death is an outright lie based on your clear lack of knowledge on the subject.
Also…5.5 ph …obviously, not blood ph. Saliva and urine is just a simple test people can do to be healthier. Speaking of ignorance, must you pick apart every little detail rather than look at the fact some of your theories could be flawed?
Joseph,
As pointed out salivary and urinary saliva are meaningless when it comes to measuring blood pH, which is what we are discussing when referring to health and pH.
Salivary pH can change by doing as simple as brushing your teeth or thinking of a particular food. Salivary pH is also affected by the amount of saliva being produced at the time. Urinary pH can also be affected by a number of things that have nothing to do with blood pH such as urinary tract infection and the amount of water you are drinking.
Therefore, if you want to discuss pH and health then stick to blood pH and its measurements and not inaccurate salivary or urinary pH measurements.
That’s the best you can do? I’m done here. However, with a bit of common sense and no manipulating the saliva or urine ph test by drinking or eating before testing. (everything has a specif method for testing, you should know that) Hmm which would be smilar to many inacurate testing,research, and surveys. A person can get a good understanding of what is happening within their bodies. Contrary to your beliefs, these two do have an effect on the body. Good day, it’s been a pleasure.
Joseph,
How many times do I need to repeat the fact that salivary pH DOES NOT reflect blood pH whatsoever. Use some common sense and maybe try this simple experiment. Test your salivary pH first thing in the morning before eating, drinking or brushing. Then brush your teeth and then test your salivary pH again. It should rise for a very simple reason. During the night levels of acid producing bacteria in the mouth will rise as they multiply and there is less saliva to flush them away. So the salivary pH will be more acidic first thing in the morning. When you brush your teeth you are removing a lot of those acid forming bacteria so the salivary pH rises (more alkaline). Your blood pH has not changed at all, just the pH of the saliva because salivary pH has NO correlation to blood pH.
Thanks for the tip…(joking) No kidding! Exactly why I specified…Do NOT manipulate the results.
Jospeph,
That is not manipualting the results. It is just a simple way to prove that salivary pH does not reflect blood pH as has been pointed out over and over.
Have you ever had your blood pH tested and tested your salivary pH at the same exact time? If you had then you would have found that they do not correlate with each other because salivary pH has nothing to do with blood pH. Same for urinary pH, which does not reflect blood or tissue pH as some claim.
Wow, just blew my whole sleep schedule reading all these comments. I am not a professional anything, just a person trying to find their way through the minefield of life. One thing I thought of as I kept reading about the sodium/acid comments was this. If people think that drinking baking soda/alkaline, is somehow going to be of great help to them, then since so many canned foods, processed foods are already so over brimming with them, you would think that the whole world would be free of cancer. Of course it is not. Their thoughts on this do not make very good sense at all.
Hi James, it’s only the first 20 mins. Please take a look, and let me know what you think.
What he is saying is still ridiculous. For example, claiming how the body has to be kept below baseline temperature to prevent oxidative damage. First of all the body needs to maintain its temperature in order to properly function. Many of our enzyme processes require sufficient body heat to function. In addition, the process of oxidation can be problematic if we lack antioxidant functioning, but at the same time oxidation also protects us from toxic compounds such as estrogenic substances that are broken down by oxidation. He is also overlooking the fact that we need free radicals to be healthy and survive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZyiaJ11U_M
The claim about the immune system being revved up during the day and decreasing at night in a crock as well. He does not think we are exposed to pathogens at night? Fact is that we are exposed to pathogens every second of the day, which is why our immune system is working every second of the day.
And as I have explained numerous times salivary and urinary pH DO NOT reflect blood pH. The ONLY way to determine blood pH is with a blood test. I addressed this myth as well as many of the other alkaline myths here:
http://medcapsules.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=4773&pid=6988&mode=threaded
In addition, the kidneys ARE NOT the main means of pH regulation. Respiration is. In fact he contradicts himself without realizing it when he talks about how we breathe on a CO2 (carbon dioxide) drive. The higher the CO2 in the blood the higher the carbonic acid level and CO2 and water in the blood combine to form the carbonic acid. Therefore, as acidity builds up in the blood we breath faster to reduce acidity. If we start becoming too alkaline respiration slows down to build the acidity back up.
Even the host drinking the carbonated water will not really affect his blood pH for the same reason. First of all most of the carbon dioxide will be burped out. Any that gets absorbed will simply be utilized by the body as carbonic acid is ESSENTIAL for various processes in our body and any excess rapidly eliminated through increased respiration,
Did you note where the host stated that when he used baking soda to try and alkalize that he said he started panting? There is a simple explanation for this that I just explained above. What is the byproduct of acid neutralization in the body by baking soda? Carbonic acid, which increases respiration. When people are given IV sodium bicarbonate in the hospital it is very important to monitor their blood pH as the sodium bicarbonate (“baking soda”) can cause rebound acidosis through this same exact mechanism.
His claims about the fight or flight response are also very misleading. When in a stressful situation yes our respiration goes up, but it does this in response to a higher metabolic rate. Think about it, what are two of the parameters measured in a polygraph (“lie detector”) test? Heart rate and respiration. Unless a professional liar such as a politician, lawyer or car salesperson the heart rate and respiration will BOTH go up when telling a lie as this is a form of stress. As the heart rate goes up there is more demand for oxygen to supply the heart muscle, but then heart’s higher workload also produces more CO2 during energy production. Therefore, the respiration has to increase to both provide more oxygen and to reduce carbonic acid levels. Therefore, what Fowkes is overlooking is the fact that yes the increased respiration is blowing off CO2, but it is in response to increased CO2 in the first place maintaining that balance.
If the person was blowing off too much CO2 as he is implying then the person would over alkalize the blood causing the blood vessels supplying oxygen to the brain to constrict causing the person to pass out. Respiration then slows or stops temporarily to build carbonic acid levels back up thus restoring blood flow to the brain.
I have also explained the alkaline response that occurs from the ingestion of lemon juice. What Fowkes is overlooking is the fact that ALL foods stimulate this same alkaline response. This response has absolutely nothing to do with the alkaline ash. If that were the case then beef would be considered alkaline due to all the sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium in the meat, which are all alkaline. The alkaline response is from the pancreatic bicarbonate release that occurs when the acidic chyme leaves the stomach. Therefore, it does not matter if you are consuming meats, fruits, vegetables, junk foods or whatever you will still get the same exact alkaline response.
And the cells do not release lactic acid. Cells release non-acidic lactate. The only cells in the body that release lactic acid are the acid forming bacteria that inhabit our bodies to help keep us healthy. The lactic acid myth was disproven over a decade ago.
The claims about exercise and acidity and alkalinity are complete garbage as well. And Fowkes does not seem to understand the concept of “hitting the wall”, also known as “bonk” in bicycle racing. This has NOTHING to do with acidity or alkalinity. Hitting the wall refers to when the body uses up all of its normal energy stores. These are initially glycogen for a very short period of time and eventually the body’s fat stores, which are the most efficient fuel source. When these energy stores are used up the brain needs to be protected so any fuel being generated from other sources the brain gets priority over and the muscles start shutting down to leave the extra fuel for the brain. This is why so many major athletes carbo load, to build up their glycogen stores.
In endurance athletes though studies have shown that the glycogen is only the primary fuel source for a short distance, then the body turns to the more efficient fatty acids as its primary fuel source conserving glycogen. A small amount of caffeine before a race will also help the body to burn fats and conserve glycogen since the caffeine and other xanthines block the enzyme cyclic adenosine monophosphate phosphodiesterase (cAMPPDE). By blocking cAMPPDE cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) is protected from breakdown allowing it to continue its one job of allowing brown adipose (fat) tissue to burn the white adipose tissue for energy. Same principle by which stimulant containing fat burners work. Coffee is not making the body alkaline as is being claimed.
Nor is it true that the body is alkalizing with endurance exercise. Actually just the opposite, which is also very easy to prove. When we exercise heavy we need increased oxygen intake for two reasons. One, the muscles need more oxygen for increased energy production. But what is the byproduct of cellular energy production? Not lactic acid as is incorrectly claimed, but rather acidic hydrogen ions (protons). The non-acidic lactate that people often confuse with lactic acid is actually another primary fuel source for the muscles to help maintain the endurance. When we stop the heavy exercise though we continue to breathe heavily though despite the muscles no longer needing the increased oxygen for increased energy production. So why do we continue to breathe heavily? Because the increased oxygen helps remove the acidic protons. When the level of protons drops so does our respiration. If we alkalize during prolonged heavy exercise as claimed then how can we have a build up of acidic protons during exercise? Answer, we can’t. Again, the body does not alkalize during heavy exercise as was claimed. And again, the lactic acidosis myth during exercise was disproven over a decade ago.
The host also made a mistake by stating the anti-inflammatory compounds in coffee like the polyphenols. These are actually antioxidant, not anti-inflammatory, acids found in coffee, tea, berries, etc. Coffee is not anti-inflammatory but rather pro-inflammatory. Let me explain the stimulatory effects of coffee first, then I will explain why coffee is pro-inflammatory.
Coffee helps keep us awake in the short term through several mechanisms. First of all the xanthines in coffee, such as caffeine stimulate the release of highly stimulatory epinephrine (adrenaline) and alertness promoting and blood sugar raising cortisol from the adrenal glands. In addition, the caffeine blocks adenosine receptors that when activated would normally calm us.
The adrenals are designed for short term use though during the fight or flight response. They are not designed to run for hours on end. Therefore, when we run our adrenals constantly on stimulants like coffee we actually crash our adrenal glands. When we crash our adrenal glands the stimulants will not cause the adrenals to release the small amount of epinephrine still in the adrenals, which is produced slowly, and then the person gets tired immediately. This is why so many people claim they can drink a cup of coffee and go right to sleep. They have crashed their adrenals with the regular use of stimulants.
Crashing the adrenals also leads to inflammation in the body as the adrenals produce the body’s anti-inflammatory adrenocorticosteroids.
The claims about the pH of urine in the morning are also misleading. One of the factors of urinary pH is simply the dilution of the acid in the urine. Just like the pH of any acid can be altered by dilution. When we are sleeping we are not drinking water and thus the acidity of the urine is increasing since we are ingesting less water to dilute the urine. Simple common sense. The urine is not acidic because the blood is acidic because the blood RARELY ever goes acidic.
By the way, cesium is extremely dangerous to ingest. It has been shown to be a strong cancer causing agent
Relative protection given by extract of Phyllanthus emblica fruit and an equivalent amount of vitamin C against a known clastogen–caesium chloride. Food Chem Toxicol 1992 Oct;30(10):865-9
Inhibition of clastogenic effects of cesium chloride in mice in vivo by chlorophyllin. Toxicol Lett 1991 Jun;57(1):11-7
Comparative efficacy of chlorophyllin in reducing cytotoxicity of some heavy metals. Biol Met 1991;4(3):158-61
Modification of cesium toxicity by calcium in mammalian system. Biol Trace Elem Res 1991 Nov;31(2):139-45
Cytogenetic damage induced in vivo to mice by single exposure to cesium chloride. Environ Mol Mutagen 1991;18(2):87-91
Clastogenic effects of cesium chloride on mouse bone marrow cells in vivo. Mutat Res 1990 Aug;244(4):295-8
And can have detrimental effects on the heart:
Cesium toxicity: a case of self-treatment by alternate therapy gone awry. Ther Drug Monit 2003 Feb;25(1):114-6
Acquired long QT syndrome secondary to cesium chloride supplement. J Altern Complement Med 2006 Dec;12(10):1011-4
Acquired long QT syndrome and monomorphic ventricular tachycardia after alternative treatment with cesium chloride for brain cancer. Mayo Clin Proc 2004 Aug;79(8):1065-9
Polymorphic ventricular tachycardia in a woman taking cesium chloride. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2001 Apr;24(4 Pt 1):515-7
Life-threatening Torsades de Pointes resulting from “natural” cancer treatment. Clin Toxicol (Phila) 2009 Jul;47(6):592-4
Torsades de pointes – a report of a case induced by caesium taken as a complementary medicine, and the literature review. J Clin Pharm Ther 2013 Jun;38(3):254-7
Cesium-induced QT-interval prolongation in an adolescent. Pharmacotherapy 2008 Aug;28(8):1059-65
Cesium chloride-induced torsades de pointes. Can J Cardiol 2009 Sep;25(9):e329-31
Cesium chloride induced ventricular arrhythmias in dogs: three-dimensional activation patterns and their relation to the cesium dose applied. Basic Res Cardiol 2000 Apr;95(2):152-62.
Cesium-induced atrial tachycardia degenerating into atrial fibrillation in dogs: atrial torsades de pointes? J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 1998 Sep;9(9):970-5
Spontaneous, electrically, and cesium chloride induced arrhythmia and afterdepolarizations in the rapidly paced dog heart. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2001 Apr;24(4 Pt 1):474-85
And liver:
The high pH therapy for cancer tests on mice and humans. Pharmacol Biochem Behav 1984;21 Suppl 1:1-5
DITTO !!!
James…. better you than me… I don’t have the patience to explain something five times… lol…
@ Mr Paleo
this is a site for the general public as well as those with more advanced knowledge. If you find it beneath you then you should consider joining another forum to be around those of your advanced standing.
Claire,
You can take offense at my comment, if you wish, but how many times do we have to explain that blood pH is held in a very tight range, and the idea of “body pH” is a non-sequitur?
thank you James for responding and taking the time to share your knowledge, it’s appreciated here.
I will go over their radio show again and follow your response and try to make sense of it all.
thank you
Just wondering – I,m almost always breathing slo-o-owly, and my husband – fast. Does it mean that one of us acidic and another alkaline?
Never heard of him so I looked up the video and it is nearly 50 minutes long so I am not going to sit and watch it.
Bottom line is that the body already maintains its pH in a very tight range since excess alkalinity or excess acidity can be deadly. Therefore, you cannot really force the pH either way safely. And trying to do so just stresses the body more as it has to work harder to try and counter the dangerous shift in the pH.
In addition, many alkalizers, such as baking soda, antacids and alkaline waters will neutralize the stomach acid, which can lead to all sorts of health issues including an increased risk of infection, heart disease and cancer.
If someone wants a great example of over alkalinity just hyperventilate. Hyperventilation will alkalize the blood quickly as it decreases carbonic acid levels. And what happens when you do this? You pass out because we need the carbonic acid to maintain dilation of the blood vessels. Therefore, the excess alkalinity causes the blood vessels to constrict, including around the brain. The reduced blood supply to the brain causes us to pass out. Respiration temporarily stops or slows down to build up the carbonic acid levels restoring blood flow to the brain.
totally confused now about alkaline/acid balance. Just been listening to BulletProof Executive podcast #94 with Steven Fowkes ‘Hacking you pH’. any feedback from anyone?
Is it your belief, then, since diet can not change the body’s PH, that the baking soda/molasses attempt to kill cancer cells is not possible?
Hi Ellen,
Correct, it will not work. Keep in mind that cancer cells already have a more alkaline pH than healthy cells. They need this high alkalinity to survive and thrive. This is why cancer cells export the acidic hydrogen ions produced by energy production in to the external matrix so they can maintain that highly alkaline pH. Research has shown that when cancer cells are blocked from exporting these ions the cancer cells become acidic killing them. The whole alkalizing to kill cancer cells is just another myth.
Even using a little common sense the whole concept does not make sense. The idea claimed is that the molasses provides sugar that the cancer cells thrive on. So the sugar is supposedly used to draw the alkaline baking soda in to the cells. If cancer cells already have a high affinity for sugar, particularly glucose, then why would we need the molasses at all? Glucose is abundant in the body, even if we supposedly cut out sugars from our diet since the body can produce glucose from various sources including glycogen, amino acids fats and lactate. Therefore,even if this principle was sound then the molasses would not be needed since the body’s own glucose would do the same job.
Using more common sense, if we ingest baking soda the baking soda will react with the stomach acid neutralizing both the stomach acid and the baking soda unless you dangerously overwhelm the stomach acid. Even at that how much, if any of the baking soda could ever remain intact to get inside the cancer cells considering all the other neutralizing acids the baking soda would encounter in the blood, including the acidic ions exported by the cancer cells in to the external matrix.
So the baking soda is not going to make any difference as the internal pH of cancer cells. But neutralizing the stomach acid can lead to all sorts of problems including nutritional deficiencies, which kill the vast majority of cancer patients, and immune suppression, which is also a very bad idea for someone with cancer.
In addition, molasses is high in iron that can also be a major problem for cancer patients. Iron is essential for many pathogenic microbes to flourish. Secondly, excess free iron is known to promote oxidative damage promoting cancer and in general promoting cancer cell growth, See:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8664805
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1381934
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19018762
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12678675
Bottom line is that both the attempting to alkalize with baking soda and the iron from the molasses can be detrimental to a cancer patient.
James,
Absolutely correct. I did not bring up NSAIDS because I would hope her nephrologist would know this. As for “molecular recognition”, there are other factors such as “handedness” that could play a role. I do my best to keep my scientific “verbiage” to a minimum when replying to someone on a blog, as most do not have our background and understanding of medicine, biochemistry, and physiology. I have offered to continue our discussion “off-site”. I am also on LinkedIn… Arnold Wiseman
Teresa,
I did come across this…
http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01810614
You may want to follow-up with the researchers…
Thanks for your valuable comments and for the link. I have emailed the authors, I hope they are willing to disclose some information about the diet they are testing.
My husband and I had come to the conclusion of eating more healthy fats to replace the carbs when we switched to the paleo diet. We buy most of our meat, butter, and eggs at the farmers market, but recently I started worrying that excess fat could also damage my kidneys. The thing is that my doctor also told me that animal fats could be harmful to the kidneys. But he hasn’t been able to explain me why and we haven’t found any scientific evidence showing that saturated fat could impair kidney function.
I believe that having eliminated grains, legumes and all kinds of processed foods from my diet, is already having a very positive impact in my health that might even delay the onset of renal failure (if it ever happens). The inflammatory response is certainly very harmful to the kidneys!
So for now I will follow your recommendation on keeping the protein low but increasing the fats, until a good scientific study proves the opposite… Thank you again!
Teresa,
I have no knowledge as to why your doctor would indicate that “fats” are harmful to the kidneys, since the liver is primarily responsible for fat metabolism once the small intestine breaks down it down…
There are several possibilities where altered kidney function is involved. I would recommend both genetic testing and testing for heavy metals, etc…
Fats are not going to directly affect the kidneys since they are not excreted through the kidneys. And a little inflammation is not necessarily harmful to the kidneys. Actually the opposite.
I know this sounds weird, but to understand what I am saying you need to understand the process of inflammation. In short, when there is irritation or damage to tissues hormones known as prostaglandins (PGE) are released. PGE dilates blood vessels to increase oxygen and nutrients to the tissues to promote healing of the tissues. If the blood vessels over dilate though they become permeable and the blood vessels leak fluid in to the surrounding tissues leading to the swelling and pain.
Countering these prostaglandins is actually more dangerous to the kidneys because this decreases blood flow to the kidneys and can even cause the blood supply to completely cut off to the kidneys leading to kidney failure. As I mentioned in my previous post I know of 4 people who developed kidney failure after taking a single recommended dose of the prostaglandin inhibitor ibuprofen (Advil, Motrin, Nuprin, etc.).
In addition, to help heal tissues prostaglandins also stimulate the release of angiogenesis growth factors (AGFs) such as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). AGFs stimulate blood vessel formation in damaged tissues to help promote the healing process within the tissues by allowing more oxygen and nutrients to reach the injured site.
So some inflammation can actually increase the blood supply to the kidneys helping the kidneys to function better and to promote healing.
The inflammation with the kidney disease would more likely be a result of the injury, not the cause of the injury.