Amazoniac
Member
Those would not be air quotes in case it was a conversation, I have self-respect.
- Immunity over inability: The spontaneous regression of cancer
- Spontaneous tumor regression
- Spontaneous regression of malignant tumors: Importance of the immune system and other factors (Review)
- Coley's Toxins: A Cancer Treatment History
Who knew that consuming commercial gelatin was in fact a cancer therapy..
--
@burtlancast @Obi-wan @Зевс
- Immunity over inability: The spontaneous regression of cancer
"Spontaneous tumor regression is a phenomenon that has been observed for hundreds if not thousands of years. Although the term spontaneous implies “without any apparent cause,” a review of reports demonstrates that regression generally coincides with acute infections.[1] Savarrio et al claimed to report the first ever case of spontaneous regression of a neoplasm of the oral cavity of the subset of non-Hodgkin's lymphomas known as Ki-1 anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL). King et al. reported a case of complete spontaneous regression of metastatic cutaneous melanoma with parotid and neck lymph node metastases.[9]"
"The phenomenon of spontaneous regression is also known as St. Peregrine tumor. Peregrine Laziozi (1265–1345), a young priest, was afflicted with cancer of the tibia requiring amputation of the leg; the lesion grew to a point where it broke through the skin and became severely infected. Miraculously, by the time his operation was due his physician was astonished to observe that there were no signs of the tumor. St. Peregrine's tumor never returned.[7,10] Although numerous cases of spontaneous tumor regression have been published over the last several hundreds of years, such reports have become rare in the current medical literature;[1] virtually all of these reports note regression concomitant with infections including diphtheria, gonorrhea, hepatitis, influenza, malaria, measles, smallpox, syphilis, and tuberculosis as well as various other pyogenic and nonpyogenic infections. Observation of this non-specific effect led to the emergence of active cancer immunotherapies by the 1700s.[1,11]"
"In 1891, a young bone surgeon at New York Memorial Hospital began his search for a new approach to cancer treatment, after the loss of his very first patient to cancer. Serendipitously, he discovered the record of an immigrant patient who presented with an egg-size sarcoma on his left cheek.[10] The sarcoma was operated on twice and still recurred as a 4.5-inch grape-like cluster below his left ear. The extensive wound after surgery could not be closed and skin grafts were unsuccessful. Ironically, this failure to close the wound would play a key part in the patient's eventual cure. The tumor progressed and a final operation only partially removed the tumor; the wound became severely infected with erysipelas by Streptococcus pyogenes and the patient developed a high fever. Little could be done to stop the infection, yet surprisingly, after each attack of fever the ulcer improved; the tumor shrank, and finally disappeared completely. On a subsequent review, the patient, still bearing a large scar from his previous operations, had no trace of cancer and claimed excellent health since his discharge– 7 years previously.[10,12]
Coley [the one and only] suspected that somehow the infection was responsible for the miraculous cure. He later realized that the patient's activated immunity in response to the acute infection was the key factor in cancer regression. He decided to put his theory to the test and infected his next 10 patients with erysipelas.[12,13] Problems with this approach soon became apparent; sometimes it was difficult to induce an infection, other times there was a strong reaction and the disease regressed. However, occasionally, the infection was fatal. Due to its unpredictability, he developed a vaccine containing two killed bacteria, the Gram-positive Streptococcus pyogenes and the Gram-negative Serratia marcescens. Experimental work at the time suggested that the latter bacteria increased the virulence of the former.[14] In this way, he could simulate an infection with inflammation, chills, and fever without worrying about the risks of an actual infection. This vaccine became known as “Coley's toxins.” Coley stressed that the technique of administration and the ability of the vaccine to induce mild to moderate fever was of paramount importance in the regression of cancer.[15,1] He successfully used his vaccine, in treating a man bedridden with an inoperable sarcoma involving the abdominal wall, pelvis, and bladder. The sarcoma regressed completely and the patient was followed up until his death from a heart attack 26 years later.[16]"
"Coley's immunotherapy regimen was so outstanding that even when applied to patients in their final stages of disease, some remarkable recoveries were obtained, with patients often outliving their cancer.[17,18]"
"Martha Tracy who formulated many of Coley's vaccine observed that the most effective formulation was the one that induced both local and systemic reactions.[19]"
"[..]inducing a fever was essential."
"The greatest value of Coley's Toxins is evident in the lives of patients who received the therapy. Rather than surviving additional years with cancer, many of these patients lived the rest of their lives without cancer.[23,24]"
"The last recorded use of Coley's Toxins anywhere in the world was in China in the 1980s as a primary therapy for cancer in an adult male who had terminal liver cancer involving large tumors in both lobes of the liver; he received 68 injections of Coley's Toxins in 34 weeks. By the end of this course of treatment, all of the tumors had completely regressed.[25]"
"The primary cancer therapies, namely, surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, widely accepted and practiced have their own pitfalls. The risks, deficiencies, cost, specialized skills, and medical ethics are often associated with these procedures. Even surgery, the most acceptable of the three in treatment of most tumors, has resulted in an ethical dilemma. Every time an incision is made into cancerous tumor, with even the least invasive type of incision called the needle biopsy, there is a risk of spreading the disease due to cancer cells entering the bloodstream or becoming implanted in the surrounding tissue. There are at least 10 published cases of tumors arising along the route taken by a biopsy needle.[26] Surgical excision usually done with an intention to cure also removes the protective barrier or the wall, body builds itself to protect itself from cancer metastasis. Surgery and the subsequent healing process greatly increases the risk of death by metastasis in certain cancer patients by disrupting tumor integrity, facilitating metastasis, directly seeding the tumor, inducing local angiogenesis, immune suppression, and enhancement of tumor growth.[33] Surgical stress also greatly enhances metastasis by increasing the expression of proteinases in the target organ of metastasis, metastasis being the primary concern of fatality in cancer patients.[34]"
"Spontaneous regression is a well-authenticated and natural phenomenon. Its study may lead us to a better understanding of the natural history of neoplastic disease which so commonly progresses but rarely regresses.[37] The comparative rarity of spontaneous regressions today may result from the immunosuppressive nature of conventional cancer therapies.[1] The spontaneous healing of cancer, after having been the subject of many controversies, is now accepted as an indisputable fact. The percentage of spontaneous regression as quoted by Boyers is 1 in 80,000 and 1 in 100,000 by Bashford; it may be subjected to criticism but proves a remarkable fact that cancer is not an irreversible process.[38]"
"The disturbance of tumor such as biopsy and surgical procedures cause a greatly increased number of cancer cells to enter the bloodstream, while most medical intervention (especially chemotherapy) suppresses the immune system. This combination is a recipe for disaster. It is the metastases that kill, while primary tumors in general, and those in the breast in particular, can be relatively harmless. These findings have been confirmed by recent research which shows that surgery, even if unrelated to the cancer, can trigger an explosive spread of metastases and lead to an untimely end.[39]"
"Though all of us develop cancer cells in our life time, not all of us develop cancer. The proportion of risk of cancer varies from person to person and the individuals’ exposure to common febrile infections as shown by epidemiologic studies. What helps the majority safe guard against cancer? Do acute infections have a direct and spontaneous role in the prevention and regression of cancer?[43]"
"As early as 1899, British cancer researcher D’Arcy Power observed, “Where malaria is common, cancer is rare.”[44] Between 1929 and 1991, at least 15 investigations including 8 case–control studies examined the link between infectious disease and cancer and all but one have found that a history of infectious disease reduces the risk of cancer.[41,28]"
"Since spontaneous regression is often associated with a previous history of acute infections and fever, it is likely that fever-causing pathogens have a beneficial role to play in activating and stimulating the immune defenses which battle the invading pathogens as well as gain a new-found recognition of cancer cells and attack them vigorously. Fever whether natural (acute infections) or induced (Coley's Toxins) stimulate a multitude of cascading, interlinking, and complex pathways of the immune system simultaneously releasing numerous products in the right quantity and qualities to combat the disease which may not be humanly possible to reproduce in vitro. This may explain why single cytokine therapy or immune products don’t give desirable results in cancer therapy, besides being expensive, toxic, and at times fatal due to the unnatural challenge they pose to the human system.[40,10]"
"Unfortunately, even during cancer immunotherapy, an acute febrile reaction is often regarded as an unwanted symptom rather than an integral and healing component of the immune response.[1]"
"Pyrogenic substances and a more recent use of whole body hyperthermia to mimic the physiologic response to fever have successfully been administered in palliative and curative treatment protocols for metastatic cancer.[40]"
"Acute infections and fever provoke an immediate and effective immune response that can fight infectious agents as well as cancer at the same time; similarly Coley's Toxins were a highly effective anticancer treatment because they worked by stimulating a powerful immune response."
"Fever plays a beneficial role when body's immunity is challenged, and helps in the natural destruction of cancer cells. Cellular damage occurs only at temperatures above 108°F, but much good is accomplished at lower temperatures.[16,46]"
"The recent 6-year Norwegian follow-up study on breast cancer in women [phew!] also accepts the fact of natural regression in one-fifth of the untreated cases that were followed up; the authors concluded that this may reflect the fact that these cancers are rarely allowed to follow their natural course.[48]"
"It is interesting to note that the current primary cancer management procedures neither harness the benefits of patients’ own immune system nor stimulate it to achieve tumor regression but actively suppress it; thus it does not run parallel to body's own defensive mechanisms but opposes its natural role. An ideal cancer management would involve the stimulation of the immune system, its complex effective and reproducible in vivo mechanisms that fight cancer. Acute infections are beneficial in the prevention and regression of tumors. In conclusion, childhood febrile infections can prevent cancer in adulthood. Asepsis, fever control, surgery, and immunosuppressive therapies are known to have an inverse relation to cancer regression, while acute infection, fever, and cancer vaccines by the virtue of immunostimulation induce regression of cancer even in the most advanced stage of disease and prove that cancer is not an irreversible process without a cure.[1,43]"
"The phenomenon of spontaneous regression is also known as St. Peregrine tumor. Peregrine Laziozi (1265–1345), a young priest, was afflicted with cancer of the tibia requiring amputation of the leg; the lesion grew to a point where it broke through the skin and became severely infected. Miraculously, by the time his operation was due his physician was astonished to observe that there were no signs of the tumor. St. Peregrine's tumor never returned.[7,10] Although numerous cases of spontaneous tumor regression have been published over the last several hundreds of years, such reports have become rare in the current medical literature;[1] virtually all of these reports note regression concomitant with infections including diphtheria, gonorrhea, hepatitis, influenza, malaria, measles, smallpox, syphilis, and tuberculosis as well as various other pyogenic and nonpyogenic infections. Observation of this non-specific effect led to the emergence of active cancer immunotherapies by the 1700s.[1,11]"
"In 1891, a young bone surgeon at New York Memorial Hospital began his search for a new approach to cancer treatment, after the loss of his very first patient to cancer. Serendipitously, he discovered the record of an immigrant patient who presented with an egg-size sarcoma on his left cheek.[10] The sarcoma was operated on twice and still recurred as a 4.5-inch grape-like cluster below his left ear. The extensive wound after surgery could not be closed and skin grafts were unsuccessful. Ironically, this failure to close the wound would play a key part in the patient's eventual cure. The tumor progressed and a final operation only partially removed the tumor; the wound became severely infected with erysipelas by Streptococcus pyogenes and the patient developed a high fever. Little could be done to stop the infection, yet surprisingly, after each attack of fever the ulcer improved; the tumor shrank, and finally disappeared completely. On a subsequent review, the patient, still bearing a large scar from his previous operations, had no trace of cancer and claimed excellent health since his discharge– 7 years previously.[10,12]
Coley [the one and only] suspected that somehow the infection was responsible for the miraculous cure. He later realized that the patient's activated immunity in response to the acute infection was the key factor in cancer regression. He decided to put his theory to the test and infected his next 10 patients with erysipelas.[12,13] Problems with this approach soon became apparent; sometimes it was difficult to induce an infection, other times there was a strong reaction and the disease regressed. However, occasionally, the infection was fatal. Due to its unpredictability, he developed a vaccine containing two killed bacteria, the Gram-positive Streptococcus pyogenes and the Gram-negative Serratia marcescens. Experimental work at the time suggested that the latter bacteria increased the virulence of the former.[14] In this way, he could simulate an infection with inflammation, chills, and fever without worrying about the risks of an actual infection. This vaccine became known as “Coley's toxins.” Coley stressed that the technique of administration and the ability of the vaccine to induce mild to moderate fever was of paramount importance in the regression of cancer.[15,1] He successfully used his vaccine, in treating a man bedridden with an inoperable sarcoma involving the abdominal wall, pelvis, and bladder. The sarcoma regressed completely and the patient was followed up until his death from a heart attack 26 years later.[16]"
"Coley's immunotherapy regimen was so outstanding that even when applied to patients in their final stages of disease, some remarkable recoveries were obtained, with patients often outliving their cancer.[17,18]"
"Martha Tracy who formulated many of Coley's vaccine observed that the most effective formulation was the one that induced both local and systemic reactions.[19]"
"[..]inducing a fever was essential."
"The greatest value of Coley's Toxins is evident in the lives of patients who received the therapy. Rather than surviving additional years with cancer, many of these patients lived the rest of their lives without cancer.[23,24]"
"The last recorded use of Coley's Toxins anywhere in the world was in China in the 1980s as a primary therapy for cancer in an adult male who had terminal liver cancer involving large tumors in both lobes of the liver; he received 68 injections of Coley's Toxins in 34 weeks. By the end of this course of treatment, all of the tumors had completely regressed.[25]"
"The primary cancer therapies, namely, surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, widely accepted and practiced have their own pitfalls. The risks, deficiencies, cost, specialized skills, and medical ethics are often associated with these procedures. Even surgery, the most acceptable of the three in treatment of most tumors, has resulted in an ethical dilemma. Every time an incision is made into cancerous tumor, with even the least invasive type of incision called the needle biopsy, there is a risk of spreading the disease due to cancer cells entering the bloodstream or becoming implanted in the surrounding tissue. There are at least 10 published cases of tumors arising along the route taken by a biopsy needle.[26] Surgical excision usually done with an intention to cure also removes the protective barrier or the wall, body builds itself to protect itself from cancer metastasis. Surgery and the subsequent healing process greatly increases the risk of death by metastasis in certain cancer patients by disrupting tumor integrity, facilitating metastasis, directly seeding the tumor, inducing local angiogenesis, immune suppression, and enhancement of tumor growth.[33] Surgical stress also greatly enhances metastasis by increasing the expression of proteinases in the target organ of metastasis, metastasis being the primary concern of fatality in cancer patients.[34]"
"Spontaneous regression is a well-authenticated and natural phenomenon. Its study may lead us to a better understanding of the natural history of neoplastic disease which so commonly progresses but rarely regresses.[37] The comparative rarity of spontaneous regressions today may result from the immunosuppressive nature of conventional cancer therapies.[1] The spontaneous healing of cancer, after having been the subject of many controversies, is now accepted as an indisputable fact. The percentage of spontaneous regression as quoted by Boyers is 1 in 80,000 and 1 in 100,000 by Bashford; it may be subjected to criticism but proves a remarkable fact that cancer is not an irreversible process.[38]"
"The disturbance of tumor such as biopsy and surgical procedures cause a greatly increased number of cancer cells to enter the bloodstream, while most medical intervention (especially chemotherapy) suppresses the immune system. This combination is a recipe for disaster. It is the metastases that kill, while primary tumors in general, and those in the breast in particular, can be relatively harmless. These findings have been confirmed by recent research which shows that surgery, even if unrelated to the cancer, can trigger an explosive spread of metastases and lead to an untimely end.[39]"
"Though all of us develop cancer cells in our life time, not all of us develop cancer. The proportion of risk of cancer varies from person to person and the individuals’ exposure to common febrile infections as shown by epidemiologic studies. What helps the majority safe guard against cancer? Do acute infections have a direct and spontaneous role in the prevention and regression of cancer?[43]"
"As early as 1899, British cancer researcher D’Arcy Power observed, “Where malaria is common, cancer is rare.”[44] Between 1929 and 1991, at least 15 investigations including 8 case–control studies examined the link between infectious disease and cancer and all but one have found that a history of infectious disease reduces the risk of cancer.[41,28]"
"Since spontaneous regression is often associated with a previous history of acute infections and fever, it is likely that fever-causing pathogens have a beneficial role to play in activating and stimulating the immune defenses which battle the invading pathogens as well as gain a new-found recognition of cancer cells and attack them vigorously. Fever whether natural (acute infections) or induced (Coley's Toxins) stimulate a multitude of cascading, interlinking, and complex pathways of the immune system simultaneously releasing numerous products in the right quantity and qualities to combat the disease which may not be humanly possible to reproduce in vitro. This may explain why single cytokine therapy or immune products don’t give desirable results in cancer therapy, besides being expensive, toxic, and at times fatal due to the unnatural challenge they pose to the human system.[40,10]"
"Unfortunately, even during cancer immunotherapy, an acute febrile reaction is often regarded as an unwanted symptom rather than an integral and healing component of the immune response.[1]"
"Pyrogenic substances and a more recent use of whole body hyperthermia to mimic the physiologic response to fever have successfully been administered in palliative and curative treatment protocols for metastatic cancer.[40]"
"Acute infections and fever provoke an immediate and effective immune response that can fight infectious agents as well as cancer at the same time; similarly Coley's Toxins were a highly effective anticancer treatment because they worked by stimulating a powerful immune response."
"Fever plays a beneficial role when body's immunity is challenged, and helps in the natural destruction of cancer cells. Cellular damage occurs only at temperatures above 108°F, but much good is accomplished at lower temperatures.[16,46]"
"The recent 6-year Norwegian follow-up study on breast cancer in women [phew!] also accepts the fact of natural regression in one-fifth of the untreated cases that were followed up; the authors concluded that this may reflect the fact that these cancers are rarely allowed to follow their natural course.[48]"
"It is interesting to note that the current primary cancer management procedures neither harness the benefits of patients’ own immune system nor stimulate it to achieve tumor regression but actively suppress it; thus it does not run parallel to body's own defensive mechanisms but opposes its natural role. An ideal cancer management would involve the stimulation of the immune system, its complex effective and reproducible in vivo mechanisms that fight cancer. Acute infections are beneficial in the prevention and regression of tumors. In conclusion, childhood febrile infections can prevent cancer in adulthood. Asepsis, fever control, surgery, and immunosuppressive therapies are known to have an inverse relation to cancer regression, while acute infection, fever, and cancer vaccines by the virtue of immunostimulation induce regression of cancer even in the most advanced stage of disease and prove that cancer is not an irreversible process without a cure.[1,43]"
- Spontaneous tumor regression
- Spontaneous regression of malignant tumors: Importance of the immune system and other factors (Review)
- Coley's Toxins: A Cancer Treatment History
"The make-up of Coley's Toxin's is remarkably simple. From 1894 until 1906, Coley's Toxins was made by Dr. B.H. Buxton of Cornell University. He soaked one pound of ground beef over night in 1000 cc of water. Then he boiled the beef for one hour before filtering it through cotton cloth. At that point, he added ten grams of peptone and five grams of sodium chloride, then tested the mixture with litmus to get the solution slightly alkaline. He boiled the solution for one hour, filtered it through filter paper, then boiled it again for a half-hour, once a day, three days in a row. The solution was then seeded with a live streptococcus solution and let stand for ten days. The solution was covered, but the growth needed air. The solution became cloudy. Then a few cc of the live Bacillus prodigiosus was added to the solution and allowed to grow for ten days more. At that point, the solution was heated for two hours at 58°C, and a bit of thymol was added. The vaccine was stored at 2°C to 4°C.
From 1906 until 1920, Dr. Martha Tracy — who had worked with Buxton — changed the way the vaccine was made. She grew the two bacteria separately. Then she did a nitrogen determination on the B. prodigiosus and, depending on what she found, she added a certain amount of Bacillus prodigiosus to the streptococcus growth. I do not like this way of making the vaccine. If one makes a mistake in doing the nitrogen determination and gets too much of the B. prodigiosus, the vaccine will turn very toxic. Making the vaccine as per Buxton, one will never get a toxic vaccine.
In 1990, I had a call from Don Carrow, MD in Tampa, Florida. Dr. Carrow wanted to know how to make Coley's Toxins. I sent him the above information, Rather than using beef broth, he used as a broth Difco AOAC, a product of Difco Laboratories in Detroit. In 1000 cc of water, he added 15 grams of Difco AOAC, 10 grams of Bacto peptone — another Difco product — five grams of sodium chloride and 100 grams of glucose, He got the ph from 7.1 to 7.2. Dr. Carrow then added a few cc of live streptococcus solution and let it stand at 36°C for ten days. He got the 1,000 cc to 25°C and seeded it with live Serratia marcescens and let it grow for another ten days. At that point, the vaccine was heated to 65°C for two hours to get a killed vaccine, and Carrow added 0.03 cc per cc of benzyl alcohol. The vaccine was stored at 2°C to 4°C. The 1,000 cc was then filtered through a seven micron filter with care taken not to remove the dead bacteria.
He had a cancer patient ready to treat with his Coley's Toxins. A 50-year-old nurse with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, this patient had a tumor under one arm that was the size of a football. He injected his Coley's Toxins into the center of that big tumor with a three inch long needle. Injections were done each day. These produced first shaking chills, then a fever of 104°F. I do not know how many injections were given, but the tumor was reduced to a flabby bag that was removed by surgery. The bag contained no cancer cells. Dr. Carrow reported in 2002, shortly before his own death, that the patient remained cancer-free."
"Another doctor, whom I'll call Doctor Y, has added a new dimension to the treatment of cancer with Coley's Toxins. He sets up an IV of Coley's Toxins in his office for his patients. He then shows the patients how to do the injections at home as self-medication and sends them home with a 20 cc bottle of Coley's Toxins. He instructs the patient to have rectal suppositories of Tylenol on hand, since rectal suppositories will terminate a reaction to Coley's Toxins quickly. The patient is to do an injection at about 8:00 AM. For an hour, he cautions, the patient will feel cold and may shake. Then the fever will come on and the pulse will increase to about 125. The patient is told to check temperature and pulse every hour. If the fever exceeds 104°F, or if the pulse exceeds 135, the patient should terminate the reaction with Tylenol. This will not happen often. The fever should end by 6:00 PM."
From 1906 until 1920, Dr. Martha Tracy — who had worked with Buxton — changed the way the vaccine was made. She grew the two bacteria separately. Then she did a nitrogen determination on the B. prodigiosus and, depending on what she found, she added a certain amount of Bacillus prodigiosus to the streptococcus growth. I do not like this way of making the vaccine. If one makes a mistake in doing the nitrogen determination and gets too much of the B. prodigiosus, the vaccine will turn very toxic. Making the vaccine as per Buxton, one will never get a toxic vaccine.
In 1990, I had a call from Don Carrow, MD in Tampa, Florida. Dr. Carrow wanted to know how to make Coley's Toxins. I sent him the above information, Rather than using beef broth, he used as a broth Difco AOAC, a product of Difco Laboratories in Detroit. In 1000 cc of water, he added 15 grams of Difco AOAC, 10 grams of Bacto peptone — another Difco product — five grams of sodium chloride and 100 grams of glucose, He got the ph from 7.1 to 7.2. Dr. Carrow then added a few cc of live streptococcus solution and let it stand at 36°C for ten days. He got the 1,000 cc to 25°C and seeded it with live Serratia marcescens and let it grow for another ten days. At that point, the vaccine was heated to 65°C for two hours to get a killed vaccine, and Carrow added 0.03 cc per cc of benzyl alcohol. The vaccine was stored at 2°C to 4°C. The 1,000 cc was then filtered through a seven micron filter with care taken not to remove the dead bacteria.
He had a cancer patient ready to treat with his Coley's Toxins. A 50-year-old nurse with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, this patient had a tumor under one arm that was the size of a football. He injected his Coley's Toxins into the center of that big tumor with a three inch long needle. Injections were done each day. These produced first shaking chills, then a fever of 104°F. I do not know how many injections were given, but the tumor was reduced to a flabby bag that was removed by surgery. The bag contained no cancer cells. Dr. Carrow reported in 2002, shortly before his own death, that the patient remained cancer-free."
"Another doctor, whom I'll call Doctor Y, has added a new dimension to the treatment of cancer with Coley's Toxins. He sets up an IV of Coley's Toxins in his office for his patients. He then shows the patients how to do the injections at home as self-medication and sends them home with a 20 cc bottle of Coley's Toxins. He instructs the patient to have rectal suppositories of Tylenol on hand, since rectal suppositories will terminate a reaction to Coley's Toxins quickly. The patient is to do an injection at about 8:00 AM. For an hour, he cautions, the patient will feel cold and may shake. Then the fever will come on and the pulse will increase to about 125. The patient is told to check temperature and pulse every hour. If the fever exceeds 104°F, or if the pulse exceeds 135, the patient should terminate the reaction with Tylenol. This will not happen often. The fever should end by 6:00 PM."
Who knew that consuming commercial gelatin was in fact a cancer therapy..
--
@burtlancast @Obi-wan @Зевс