The GcMAF Book (2.0)

Chapter 16

Retro-Docs and Nano-Medicine: A Rant

Conventional doctors are going to have to let go of their need to see a cancer on an X-ray before treating it. In the nano-world of molecular medicine we can now contemplate a patient’s “metabolic landscape” to spot subtle biochemical markers—signposts alerting us to current or future disease. Several examples are provided. Tests like AMAS (now) and Nagalase (in the future) track the molecular biological footprints of malignancy, enabling diagnosis and initiation of treatment much earlier in the evolution of the disease—long before imaging could detect a mass.

Molecular biology: rewriting the rules for medical practice

Let me take a brief detour here to address the issue of doctors who are uncomfortable treating a cancer that is too small to see on imaging. In order to feel okay about treating, these guys really need visual—and just aren’t comfortable with biochemical—evidence. In this, the dawning new age of molecular medicine, however, the zone between no disease and clear-cut, palpable, imageable disease is becoming increasingly blurry. Thanks to sophisticated testing and a deeper understanding of the molecular biology of pathological processes, we are now able to “see” the earliest stages of disease—and even the preexisting biochemical landscape that sets the stage for it—long before we can pin down its location with imaging (X-rays, CAT Scans, and MRIs).

My advice to doctors who need visual—as opposed to biochemical laboratory— evidence of disease is this: get over it! We have entered the nano-age of molecular medicine, where we can detect the earliest stages of disease via biochemical changes. In the olden days (ten years ago) imaging and palpating disease were the best we had, but these modalities have become increasingly archaic as genetics and molecular biological testing pave the way to earlier identification of pathological changes, allowing us to reverse disease while it is still in the formative stages, before symptoms appear.

As a prime example of this trend, Nagalase testing will become the new cholesterol, the screening test for cancer that will be part of regular blood testing. Using elevated Nagalase and AMAS levels, we will be able to treat and reverse tumors we never get to actually see—much less biopsy.

Via molecular medicine testing we can now contemplate a patient’s “metabolic landscape” examining subtle genetic and biochemical markers that are signposts pointing to a currently developing or even a future disease. For example:

A low DHEA-S (an adrenal hormone; the most prevalent hormone in the human body) level, for example, tells us this person is not capable of managing stress very well, and thus prone to cancer, allergies, autoimmune disease, and other immunological disorders. Because of their compromised ability to manage all kinds of stress (toxic, inflammatory, infectious, allergic, chemical, traumatic, emotional) individuals with low DHEA levels have shorter lifespans.

An elevated MCV (mean corpuscular volume above 90) on a simple CBC (complete blood count) tells us the patient has a vitamin B12 and/or folic acid deficiency. Untreated, this significantly raises risk for a host of diseases including cardiovascular disease (heart attack, stroke, senile brain disease),neurological diseases (depression, dementia), and all cancers.

The vitamin D deficient individual is a sitting duck for cancer, diabetes, autoimmune disease, osteoporosis, and a host of other afflictions. Vitamin D deficiency very common (over 70% of Americans have one) and is a sure sign of dramatically higher risk of neoplasm. Ideal level is 50-100. Levels below 30 put one at 400% baseline risk for all types of cancer. Testing is the only way to determine deficiency. Though 10,000 IU a day would be a reasonable dose for someone who is deficient (below 50), testing is required to determine optimum dose.

A positive AMAS (Anti-Malignin Antibody, Serum) test tells us cancer is absolutely present. (See Chapter 13.) AMAS measures antibodies the immune system makes in response to cancer cell antigens. This test is 95% accurate—99% on repeat.

An elevated Nagalase (enzyme made by cancer cells and viruses that protects them by shutting down the immune response) tells us a cancer or virus is brewing.

I wrote an book (Outsmarting the Number One Killer ( and about how to use six simple molecular medical markers to predict atherosclerosis (heart attack, stroke). Once the biochemical aberrations that cause atherosclerosis have been detected, natural medicines can be used to reverse them, long before symptoms appear (sudden death is the first symptom in about a third of all cases) and long before imaging could identify the blockage. An added bonus would be the disease is diagnosed by blood testing, so more invasive approaches (intravenous coronary angiograms are not my idea of a “fun time”) can be sidestepped.

A double standard

The lipid panel is a really lousy marker for cardiovascular disease. Half of all people with an elevated cholesterol never have a heart attack or stroke. Half of people who get a stroke or heart attack have a normal cholesterol. Nevertheless, doctors pay literal homage to an elevated cholesterol by whipping off the obligatory prescription for a statin drug; treating it gives them the feeling they are nipping something in the bud, even though they have not a clue about where that bud might be located. So why do doctors ignore—even fear—the AMAS and Nagalase tests that would do the same thing for cancer that cholesterol does for cardiovascular disease? It just doesn’t make sense. (Sometimes, in my darker moments, I wonder if the availability—or lack thereof—of a drug for the abnormal marker might have something to do with it?)

Earlier detection allows earlier treatment

Treating abnormal lab results (rather than positive imaging or physical exams) allows us to begin treating earlier and earlier in the disease process. As in the examples above, we can detect and reverse a disease with diet, exercise, and nutritional supplements if we catch it early enough. The longer we wait to get the “old-time” diagnosis, the more advanced the disease and the more extreme the treatment measures must be.

In terms of cancer, the bottom line here is that practicing the best possible medicine will force us to dispense with the luxury of palpating the mass or seeing it on an X-ray. Lives will be lost if we stay stuck in that groove. The best doctors will be using newer biochemical techniques to find disease early.

When rising Nagalase levels expose these early occult cancers, the first line of therapy will be GcMAF (100 ng/week, intramuscularly), along with immune strengthening, anti-cancer nutritional medicines. If the GcMAF program works, the Nagalase level (which should be checked monthly) will go down and the doctor and patient can rest assured that the cancer is going away. We’ll sleep better at night.

As mentioned above, it may seem bizarre and surreal to be treating a cancer that is still invisible, but this is exactly what is happening—and it works. Dr. Yamamoto’s studies showed that with GcMAF it works 100% of the time.

Once Nagalase testing is available (and physicians have learned how to use it), the rules for treating cancer will change. Nagalase testing will not only permit extremely early detection of the presence of cancer cells, it’ll also give us a handle on how much cancer there is (we call this “load” or “burden”). And it can accomplish these daunting tasks before the tumor has expanded to the point where imaging can blow its cover.

Guidance in this process by a trained professional is absolutely crucial. Trying to be your own plumber may work at times—a leaky faucet probably won’t kill you—but in matters of life and death, it is absolutely essential to have experienced guidance. In the early days of GcMAF availability, until proper accreditation is established, finding a doctor who is experienced in the use of GcMAF and Nagalase testing will be challenging.

Copyright © 2010 Timothy J. Smith, M.D.
Comments X

Posting of comments is disabled unless you are logged in.

      About this comment system

      This site is using a contextual comment system to help us gather targeted feedback about the book. Instead of commenting on an entire chapter, you can leave comments on any indivdual "block" in the chapter. A "block" with comments looks like this:

      A "block" is a paragraph, list item, code sample, or other small chunk of content. It'll get highlighted when you select it:

      To post a comment on a block, just click in the gutter next to the bit you want to comment on:

      As we edit the book, we'll review everyone's comments and roll them into a future version of the book. We'll mark reviewed comments with a little checkmark:

      Please make sure to leave a full name (and not a nickname or screenname) if you'd like your contributions acknowledged in print.

      Many, many thanks to Jack Slocum; the inspiration and much of the code for the comment system comes from Jack's blog, and this site couldn't have been built without his wonderful YAHOO.ext library. Thanks also to Yahoo for YUI itself.