Back to Index
KELLEY EIDEM and “HOW I CURED STAGE 4 CANCER IN TWO WEEKS FOR LESS THAN THE COST OF A NIGHT AT THE MOVIES”
I have suggested elsewhere that poor quality cancer testimonials may tell you little about the effectiveness of the treatment being recommended, but they can reveal a great deal about the trustworthiness of the author. Nothing illustrates this better than the personal testimonial of a newcomer to active charlatanry, Kelley Eidem.
Here it is, from http://hubpages.com/hub/How-I-Cured-Stage-4-Cancer-in-Two-Weeks-For-Less-Than-The-Cost-Of-A-Night-At-The-Movies (For the sake of brevity I have interspersed his account with the reasons why what he is describing is NOT cancer. The long section that I have coloured red can be skimmed through as it is not directly relevant to the diagnosis.) :-
“Let me start from the beginning. One morning as I was about to step into the shower, I noticed a couple of large round looking red splotches on my thigh and calf. They were about the size of a half dollar
No cancer grows to this size overnight, and “red splotches” strongly suggests an inflammatory skin condition, possibly the quite common erythema nodosum.
“I wasn't sure what to make of them, but they stood out like crazy. By the next day, the two red lesions had turned brown. Only they were now accompanied by several more large red splotches.
Some were on my upper back, lower back, hips, thighs and calves on both sides of my body. Within 24 hours, they turned brown, too".
Again strongly suggestive of a skin rash. Many will have observed how they can change colour like this as they age, whereas skin metastases don’t . Also no cancer behaves this way. New secondary deposits may appear week by week, but not dozens of fully formed ones overnight.
“At this point, most people would probably have freaked out.
No, most people would have wanted to know what was wrong and seen a doctor. Even most lay people would recognise that this is most unlikely to be cancer.
I had a darn good reason not to, however. I couple years earlier, I had written a book entitled The Doctor Who Cures Cancer.
Gathering the research for the book gave me some critically important information that helped me to develop my own method.
I figured, if what I had was cancer, that's not a problem because curing cancer isn't as difficult as we've been led to believe.
No, I wasn't pregnant!
Many years earlier, I'd also learned that the common pregnancy tests sold in drug stores will sometimes produce a positive result if the person taking the test has cancer.
A call to the makers of one of the products confirmed that this is true: pregnancy screening tests can sometimes pick up the presence of cancer. It is well known among physicians that home pregnancy tests can show a false positive for pregnancy when the person being tested has cancer.
The test isn't real accurate if the result is negative because the test kit requires that a high threshold be met before the test will read positive.
easily reach the threshold, but a person with cancer doesn't necessarily produce enough of the hormone to register on the test kit.
But if the kit does show "positive" in a non-pregnant person, it is highly accurate for uncovering cancer.
It seemed to me that it was worth a shot as a screening mechanism. Since I am a male, a positive test result would tell me what I needed to know.
I did the test, and sure enough, the 'pregnancy' test result came up positive. You might be wondering why a pregnancy test would read positive.
I'm glad you asked. ;-) Pregnancy tests screen for the presence of a hormone called HCGH (human chorionic gonaditrophin hormone.)
It's the same hormone that is elevated in cancer patients. But in most cases the level in cancer patients aren't high enough to trigger a positive test result.
Down below will be listed information on a more sophisticated pregnancy test that's about 97% accurate for detecting cancer. I'll tell you more about that test in a minute.
Pregnancy kit 'says' I'm pregnant!
In my case, my HCGH was high enough to score positive on the test. So there I was, a man, with more than a dozen large lesions AND a positive pregnancy test result!
There was no point for me to go to a physician at that point, because (a) I had no insurance, and far more importantly, (b) chemo sucks in treating solid mass tumors, and I had more than a dozen visible tumors! There's no telling how many tumors there might have been hidden within my body.
Then there was reason (C) for not going to see a physician!!! The first thing the doctor would have wanted to do would be to cut out a portion of one of the lesions to have it examined by a pathologist.
I had learned something profound when writing The Doctor Who Cures Cancer which was later confirmed in a book about Judah Folkman, M.D., (inventor of Angiostatin) that the act of cutting out a portion of a tumor activates more tumors to sprout wings.
“All of my lesions went away in about four or five days. I had a dozen or more, so that was pretty good, if you ask me.
PM Again highly suggestive of erythema nodosum. Even if there was instant and total cell death with treatment, a half-dollar-sized cancer would take several weeks to disappear as the body gradually disposed of the dead tissue.
This was, then, definitely NOT cancer. Don’t take my word for it. Research it yourself.
What about the positive pregnancy test? Even that doesn’t fit well any kind of metastatic cancer to the skin. Cancer of the testis is the only cancer to regularly produce positive pregnancy tests at home test kit levels of detection and it metastasises to lymph nodes or lung, not skin.
There are rare false positives from home test kits, or perhaps he did not perform the test properly. Nevertheless he would be well-advised even at this stage to check his HCG status with a proper laboratory. If the test was still positive he may yet be found to have an unsuspected testicular cancer or benign pituitary tumour. (Are you listening, Kelley?)
Might Eidem's treatment nevertheless work for cancer?
Capsaicin does have anticancer activity in the test tube and in one animal model, but so do innumerable other chemicals, and I have seen nothing to yet suggest that it is likely to be more curative of cancer than the many other plant-derived forms of chemotherapy now in use. We can also only guess at the dosage and routes of administration that may be needed for it to be optimally useful in human cancer.
Eidem also refers to Revici’s (the “Man Who Cures Cancer”) ideas on urinary pH and “catabolic” and “anabolic” cancers. They have never found support despite ever-increasing understanding of the cancer state. Nor have his methods shown convincing effects upon established cancer. I have looked at some of his best-documented evidence myself here.
However, some may still wish to try Capsaicin when desperate and there is no obviously better conventional treatment. Please try to do so within a proper clinical study or at least under reliable medical surveillance, so that we can learn something from your experience.
I, together with some other doctors have actually had considerable dialogue with Kelly Eidem over the years, mainly relating to his claims about Revici (“The Man Who Cures Cancer “). He should by now have some comprehension of all the ways in which treatments can look like cancer cures when they are not, and why such claims are worthless unless there was a definite diagnosis of cancer in the first place.
It thus seemed incredibly mischievous of him to be now making such grandiose claims on so little substance. I even considered whether there may be someone else behind this, such as a sceptic wanting to demonstrate how easy it is to establish a new cancer fad.
On further thought Eidem’s behaviour probably is consistent with the poor level of medical knowledge that he has shown in the past, and he has always dismissed anything that does not fit in with his own understandings as arising from bad faith or conspiracy.