The Dog Cancer Survival Guide (24 page)

While it’s true that a healthy immune system has mechanisms which deal with cancer, if your dog already has cancer, the system has failed or been overwhelmed. Cancer suppresses immune function in general, and some lifestyle choices can further suppress it. Oddly enough, certain immune system cells can even actively help cancer to spread (see the sidebar about macrophages on
page 64
). Tumors actually have several ways to evade the immune system’s cancer-killing strategies, making this a very complex topic. A full discussion is beyond the scope of this book, but what’s most important is this: the immune system’s interactions with cancer are complex and intricate. There are many different types of cells doing many different jobs, and they intersect with cancer at several levels. Several Full Spectrum treatments aim to boost the immune system in specific and strategic ways, as covered in later sections.

In addition to strategic recruitment or disabling of the immune system, there are several other mechanisms cancer uses to spread in the body. It can cause inflammation, shift the body’s metabolism, start breaking down sugars without oxygen, and use enzymes to destroy neighboring connective tissue, to name just a few. How cancer spreads, also known as “cancer progression,” is a complex subject, and a thorough discussion of each of the mechanisms tumors use to grow and metastasize deserves its own book. You’ll encounter more information about progression throughout the rest of the book, both in the next section on cancer-causing agents and in the Full Spectrum treatment section.

“Finding out your dog has cancer is devastating, especially if your dog is only 7 like my Charlie. There are so many decisions to make and so much research to do, but with the news of cancer, also comes strong motivation to find out everything you can to save your dog’s life. I talked to our chemo specialist here in Kelowna and found out that Charlie would be on Chemo for the rest of his life - once a week for the first six months, and then if the dog is still around the chemo would be reduced to once every two weeks. The side effects can be horrific and we just felt we couldn’t bear to see our beautiful dog become extremely sick from such an ordeal. So we chose the healthier route. I changed the diet drastically. I began giving most of the supplements Dr. Dressler recommends. I do massage and exercise and talking healing every day. I enjoy my daily moments with my dog and know that I am doing everything I can to keep his as healthy as possible for as long as possible.”

-Audry Arnall, Kelowna, British Columbia

In case your veterinarian looks at you strangely when you mention the treatments you find in this book, I want to explain why I’ve come to distrust some of the assumptions the mainstream veterinary community makes about cancer and how to treat it.

As the philosophically minded cancer researchers, Dr. Anna De Soto and Dr. Daniel Sonnenschein of Tufts University point out, some cancer researchers have lost the scientific mindset and started believing in their own theories. Busy vets, too, who don’t have time to do their own research, could be falling victim to the dogma.

Scientists of all kinds are schooled in the scientific mindset during their training. This mindset forces us to analyze our own assumptions and discover how we may be right, and also how we may be wrong. Here’s a rough outline of the method we use to analyze a scientific theory:

1. Look for patterns and regularities in nature, such as repeated events and common structures.
   
2. Build a hypothesis to explain those patterns. This hypothesis is not “the truth.” Instead, it is a first guess at what the truth may be.
   
3. Test the hypothesis. If it is accurate, future events will be predictable. Set up an experiment or watch natural events, and see if the hypothesis predicts what actually happens.
   
4. Compare the results to the original hypothesis. If the new data does not fit, revise the hypothesis and test again. If the hypothesis is accurate, events will be predictable, repeatable, and accounted for by the hypothesis.
   
5. A hypothesis that has undergone enough testing of this sort turns into a “theory.” A theory is a plausible explanation that has been tested and found accurate. It is still not “the truth;” it must continue to be tested.
   
6. Consider other possibilities. Are there any other explanations for what is happening? If so, can the theory be expanded to include those explanations, or do they directly contradict the theory?
   
7. If data does not fit, and cannot fit, the theory is considered invalid. A brand new hypothesis must be developed, based on the new data.
   
8. Repeat testing, based on the new hypothesis.
   

The scientist who commits to this mindset knows “truth” is elusive, and is open to new information that contradicts her hypothesis or theory. Even if she firmly believes her theory, she must keep in mind that she could be wrong. She might not like having to start over if contradicting data appears, but she is committed to finding the truth.

Unfortunately, some scientists – including some in the field of medicine and oncology – start to believe in their theories (or in theories believed by their mentors). They stop in the middle of step four, close down their minds, and become dogmatic. When evidence that contradicts their theory shows up, they ignore it and continue operating as if they were correct.

According to De Soto and Sonnenschein, this tendency to ignore contradictory evidence has been happening in the field of cancer research; the genetic mutation theory has become a dogma. Anything that directly contradicts it is often dismissed, in spite of published evidence worth contemplating.

This could be disastrous for patients. Who knows how many new treatments there are, which do not fit into current thinking, and therefore will be ignored?

If oncologists insist that genes are the main problem in cancer, while ignoring evidence that cancer might start due to environmental or lifestyle issues, or might not spread without the active cooperation of the immune system, they may be missing new avenues to a cure.

To paraphrase the popular television counselor Dr. Phil, “Would you rather be right, or would you rather cure cancer?”

Perhaps a cure for cancer will come out of the reductionist methods used by many cancer researchers. Perhaps it will come from a much broader approach that looks at body systems as a whole. I personally don’t care where it comes from. Do you?

This may seem like an academic discussion to you. I include it because, while many vets are pragmatists like I am, and don’t care where a treatment comes from as long as it works for your dog, other vets are more dogmatic.

If you have a dogmatic vet, it’s helpful to know. His bias may be informing his treatment recommendations. If he’s conventional, he may be emphasizing those methods, while minimizing, leaving out, or refusing to consider “outside the box” treatments – even though the treatments he recommends don’t give desired results. If he’s an alternative vet, he may be dismissing surgeries, chemotherapy, or radiation treatments, even though they have a history of really helping your specific dog’s cancer type.

I hope that this description of the scientific mindset – and knowing that not all scientists are blindly dogmatic – will help you to discern whether your support team is open to new ideas. There is more information on how to talk to your vet in
Chapter 22
.

PS: I don’t want you to accept what I write as dogma, either. If anything in this book is ever shown to be wrong, I will work hard to overcome my personal disappointment, as I start over. As new evidence comes up, I change my recommendations, as this second edition of the book demonstrates to readers of the first edition.