Scott: On your website it says you travel to other countries and witness other alternative therapies that aren't allowed currently in this country. What have you seen in some of those other countries and your experiences that have been successful in treating cancer that's maybe not available here yet.
Dr. Mark Rosenberg: I have traveled to other countries to use drugs myself. On my website there was a patient who was end stage with small cell lung cancer. I think he had a few weeks left to live. And I used a drug that is not approved in this country and we actually got complete remission. As far as what I think is out there now, do I think there is a drug out there now that is
the holy grail in some other country? I do not. I will applaud Germany for using, commonly using integrative techniques meaning when you get treated for cancer in Germany, it's very common to get all the traditional therapies and all the conventional... chemotherapy, but along with a lot of complementary techniques. And that's the case with Asia and South American as well. Having said that, I have not been to a country that has the holy grail to cure cancer.
Scott: Using Germany, as you mentioned, as an example, why isn't that treatment philosophy more widespread here?
Dr. Rosenberg: Well, you know, I have to say, of all the places that I've traveled, the United States tends to be the most narrow-minded, the most close-minded with regards to alternative techniques. Why is that the case? When you get trained in this country... certainly and I realize the pharmaceutical industry is a very, very powerful industry worldwide. But it seems to be more powerful in its dogma at least, in the United States. I'm actually residency trained and was board certified in emergency medicine and everything we learned really does come down from the pharmaceutical industry. So if you were to do things that was not basically taught from the pharmaceutical industry, it's considered heresy here in the United States. I wish I could answer your question and say why are we more close-minded here in the US than elsewhere, and I don't think I have the answer to that.
Scott: It's unfortunate though that a lot of people feel they have to look outside the country to find a treatment option that might fit them better than what they can get here isn't it?
Dr. Rosenberg: It is. As a matter of fact, I'm meeting with Senator Rand Paul next week because he read a letter that I had written and it was exactly that, I had taken a patient that was terminal out of the country and we got complete remission. But that treatment would not be allowed here. One of the things I'm speaking to him about is there is a law called the 'right to try' law which says that if you are terminal, you have a right, you and your physician have a right to try any drug. But that right to try is really in name only because it still requires that the drug passed a phase I clinical trial which of course is funded by a pharmaceutical company because nobody else can afford it and it's got to be approved by an oncologist who's an FDA advisor. So the right to try clause really eliminates individuals from really trying novel techniques even when they are in fact terminal.
Why are there different options for cancer treatments outside the United States? Dr. Mark Rosenberg explains the biggest reason why patients here have fewer options than those in other countries. Hear his stories of success from what he's seen and done in other countries and why that same success can't happen here. Here is why the US is behind when it comes to cancer treatment.
In order to keep our content free, some of the links may be affiliate links to trusted websites. Shopping through them will bring a small commission to iHealthTube.com. Read our full affiliate disclaimer for more info.
- 1647 reads