I'm talking about #227. The study says that it was tested in vivo.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29595070
Microarray analysis of tumor tissue identified 515 common anticancer genes in the garlic and cisplatin groups ([Formula: see text]). Gene network analysis of 252 of these genes using the Cytoscape and ClueGo software packages mapped 17 genes and 9 gene ontologies to gene networks. BC (NMIBC and MIBC) patients with low expression of centromere protein M (CENPM) showed significantly better progression-free survival than those with high expression. Garlic extract shows anticancer activity in vivo similar to that of cisplatin, with no evidence of side effects. Both appear to act by targeting protein-DNA complex assembly; in particular, expression of CENPM.
The sentence says that garlic shows similar anticancer activity to that of the chemotherapy drug cisplatin, in vivo, and without the side effects of a chemotherapy drug.
I'm not sure if you have actually read the study. Let me explain it to you:
- The study only takes into account the effect on bladder cancer in mice. They also only tested with one cell line.
- The study shows that Cisplatin in general has a stronger effect than garlic
- It also shows that the garlic has to be dosed very high to actually work (on humans that would be 80g garlic powder for an 80kg man... have fun eating that)
- There was only 6 mice in each group, which is very low and means randomness has a big influence
https://image.ibb.co/jZq01U/1.png
Do you still think, this study proves that 'Cancer is easily cured with common grocery store items'?
Because I think this study only shows that garlic contains a molecule that can cause apoptosis if it's taken in very high doses. A fact that apparently is long known.
I do agree that research in that direction might be helpful in the fight against cancer, but the study certainly does not prove the title of this thread.
The study is one of numerous studies which states that garlic reverses cancer in animals. This one says that garlic performs similarly as a chemotherapy drug, and without the side effects. You can't do human experiments without permission from the government. They won't let you. Search Youtube and the web and you will find plenty of testimonies of people who claim to have had their cancers cured through garlic.
Why don't US doctors ever prescribe herbs to patients, despite that there is clear evidence that herbs do cure illnesses? Medicine used to be herb based, after all. Not anymore. If a patient went to a doctor and was prescribed herbs that would be highly illegal and the doctor would likely lose his license and perhaps go to jail. They have to "do it by the book," and that book does not say to give herbs to patients. At best, an honest doctor will eventually suggest off-the-record to the patient to try an alternative medicine doctor if the pharmaceuticals are not working. Seen it happen.
One cannot maintain that herbs do not cure when entire countries, such as China, have medical systems based around herbs.
You will never see US doctors prescribing herbs for any ailment because there is a conspiracy to promote commercial pharmaceuticals. Doctors in western countries do not prescribe herbs anymore, and as long as the status quo is maintained, they never will.