Access to Energy

Self Experimentation

Most of the time, science is thought of in the abstract. We or others conduct quantitative observations of the physical world and try to correlate those observations within the framework of existing theory or of some new hypothesis. Most scientists are simply skilled observers who are primarily engaged in making such measurements.

Some people like to cultivate the myth that scientists are great thinkers with large brains and furrowed brows who spend their time deep in complicated thoughts beyond the understanding of most mortals. This, of course, is nonsense, but it does serve to pry a little more tax money away from many taxpayers who are fooled by the myth.

A life in basic science or applied science (engineering) is very rewarding. There are always new things to learn. The ocean of undiscovered truths, large and small, is so extensive that there is no possibility of running out of interesting things to do. Those who have an opportunity to spend their lives in science are fortunate indeed.

Although most people are not professional experimentalists, many of them do some experimentation in the course of their life's work. Moreover, an increasing number of people are conducting their final series of experiments upon their own bodies.

The curve of death from cancer vs. age rises so rapidly in the later years of life (see Figure 2 below) that those of us who do not die earlier of other causes face a veritable wall of cancer probability above the ages of 80 to 90 years. Moreover, the rate of growth of cancer is markedly affected by parameters that are under our individual control. In one experimental system, for example, the rate of growth of cancer in mice was varied over a 20-fold range by changes in diet alone (see Access to Energy 22, No. 5, p 2 (1995)).

It is widely believed that a person who is diagnosed with cancer or some other degenerative disease such as atherosclerosis or neuro-muscular degeneration has little control over his fate - that the best course is to put himself in the hands of the medical system, rely on his health insurance to pay the bills, and hope for the best. This is true in some cases. It should be true in virtually all cases. The twin demons of governmental and medical establishment control of medical research and delivery and a legal establishment that threatens to confiscate the assets of any innovator who can be held colorably liable for a patient's misfortune have, however, greatly diminished progress in therapeutic medicine.

Medicine has managed to make better progress in some (but certainly not all) areas of diagnostic technology, but progress in therapy has been very limited. As a result, when a seriously ill person embarks on a course of treatment, he is often setting out on a course of experimentation rather than a well understood and optimized therapy.

Degenerative diseases frequently disable or kill slowly, so the patient often has plenty of time to deduce that the therapy is not working in his case. Moreover, there are numerous books and sometimes friends and relatives available to tell him stories of others for whom the therapy failed. This leads him to search for alternative approaches.

The search for alternative therapies for serious diseases gives rise to the movement that is called "alternative medicine.'' (The desire for preventive medicine is also a component of this.) Alternative medicine is comprised of those techniques that are not an accepted part of ordinary medical practice. Some of these techniques are sensible and very valuable, and some are useless dead ends. (These can be worse than useless. They can be dangerous to a seriously ill patient who uses up his dwindling time pursuing them when there are other therapies that would help him.) Whether the patient chooses a therapeutic regime from ordinary medicine or alternative medicine, he is more likely to prolong life and diminish suffering if he uses diagnostic medicine in an unusual way.

The techniques of modern medicine for quantitative diagnosis of disease are often very good (this depends upon the particular disease), but they are rarely used often enough. A physician testing the blood of, for example, a leukemia victim, once every two months (unless there is a sudden change in symptoms) would be testing about as often as ordinary practice permits. More testing might cause trouble for the physician. The test is excellent and quite quantitative, but it is applied far too infrequently.

The patient is engaged in a longitudinal self experiment. There are many different things that he can do to alter the course of his disease. Even if he cannot cure it, he can very likely affect the rate of its progress. For this he needs more data. A test every couple of months just tells him about how long he can be expected to live. A test at least weekly gives him much more information. It gives him sufficient data to carefully track the progress of his disease even after averaging out the inevitable experimental noise associated with the tests.

Perhaps the relentless change in his blood values toward death can never be halted, but he may be able to alter the slope of the curve - if he can see it. Even if he is using conventional therapy, what is the effect, for example, if he cuts his protein, fat, and vitamin intake in an effort to partially starve the cancer? Does the slope increase or decrease? What is the slope following each course of chemotherapy? Is this therapy improving or diminishing his chances?

Over the past 30 years, many victims of degenerative diseases have asked me for advice about the course they should follow. If I know a useful alternative course for them, I usually tell them about it without saying that it is better or worse than other possibilities. How am I to know which therapy will be best in their particular case?

Always, however, I advise them to use the best quantitative diagnostic procedure available - and to use it much more frequently than their physician advises even if they must pay for the tests themselves.

A seriously ill patient may be involved in the last series of experiments of his life. Biochemical and environmental individuality coupled with the very limited availability of definitive medical knowledge puts him in the unique position that only he can serve as the source of good enough data to monitor his own condition. A simple graph, created by means of the miracles of modern diagnostic medicine applied, however, far more often than is ordinary medical practice, can give the patient the data he needs to try several therapeutic procedures and objectively evaluate their effect on his particular fate. This self experimentation, the data gathering and the evaluation, should be carefully considered by every seriously ill individual.



 • Self Experimentation
 • CANCER POSTPONEMENT WITH RADON
 • META-ERRORS
 • STARK RAVING MAD
 • GOOD READING
Vol. 24, No. 6

Newsletter: Access to Energy Newsletter Archive
Volume: Issues
Issue/No.: Vol. 24, No. 6

Date: February 01, 1997 07:09 PM
Title: Self Experimentation

Copyright © 2004 - Access to Energy Newsletter Archive
All rights reserved.