Do let us know how you get on.   B has been "researching" his method for
about thirty years now and should have treated a number of stage four NSCLC
cases.  You have an absolute right to know what happened to those patients
and to speak to any survivors.   They would be glad to talk to you, too.

Peter Moran

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/OTA/ota04.html#Hoxsey
In 1957, a committee of faculty members of the University of British Columbia
conducted a review of the Hoxsey treatment and facilities (582). After
visiting Hoxsey's Dallas clinic, the committee described the overall treatment
regimen, along with various other aspects of the treatment (the history of the
treatment, Hoxsey's claims for efficacy, and the history of Hoxsey's
litigation concerning the treatment). They were particularly interested in
following up on patients from British Columbia who were treated at the clinic.
The clinic gave the committee members records for 78 patients from their
"active" files (unbeknownst to the clinic, however, some of these patients had
died). The committee was able to follow up on 71 of these patients, using
British Columbia's cancer registry, death registry, and physician records.
Their detailed findings were summarized as follows:

For over one-half of the [cancer] patients from British Columbia, the result
[of treatment with the Hoxsey method] has been either death or progression of
the disease. In nearly one-quarter there was no proof that the patient ever
had cancer. Nearly one in ten of the patients had curative treatment before
going to the Hoxsey Clinic. In only one case, an external cancer, was there
any evidence at all that the Hoxsey treatment had an effect on the disease; in
that case, better results could have been obtained by orthodox means (582).

The latter case to which they refer reportedly involved a woman with a
"slow-growing cancer of the ear" who refused surgery and was treated with one
of Hoxsey's external treatments. The committee reported that the treatment
"did, in fact, remove the cancerous growth, along with a good deal of normal
tissue." It did so "with needless pain and disfigurement," given that it could
have been treated with radiation or surgery, in the committee's opinion (582).
They also reported that of the 32 patients who died, "two-thirds were dead in
less than six months, 90 per cent were dead within a year, and none survived
two years" (582).

Hoxsey made attempts (in 1945 and 1950) to have NCI review his patients'
records. On both occasions, NCI determined that the records Hoxsey submitted
did not meet NCI's previously established criteria at that time for
documenting treatment effects. In summary, these criteria required that
Hoxsey:

   * explain the composition of his herbal treatments and his regimen for
treating patients;
   * submit complete clinical and laboratory records of at least 50 patients
with internal cancer to show confirmation of the diagnosis by biopsy and
objective evidence of regression of primary growth and metastases by
measurement, photographs, and x-rays; and
   * provide proof that these patients had survived at least 5 years
following treatment (418,582,984).[...]

they're "blame the patient's attitude" and/or "blame the previous conventional
therapy" for their failures.
J

And it would be great if it worked.
 MIKE

American Cancer Society??!  about 85% of their revenue goes to lobbying
the US congress and senate on behalf of the medical industry. Only about
10% goes towards "research", just enough that they can legally solicit
donations "for cancer research".

How to murder and discredit a competitor as only very knowledgeable,
corrupt doctor could do. The medical industry is 1/7th the US economy,
plenty of motive there.