IMPORTANT FACTS ABOUT THE KOCH TREATMENT - 1941

COPYRIGHTED 1941

Those who contemplate taking the Koch Treatment should understand a few of its most important features. The first is that it is based upon an entirely different conception of disease production than any other treatment and it aims not at destroying a disease tissue or even a germ, but rather the restoration of a true normal physiology of the body at such a high level that neither disease tissue nor disease producing germs can exist there. When its true import is generally understood, it probably will find its greatest field of usefulness in the prevention of disease. But until the Medical Profession can become educated to that degree where they can fully comprehend the Koch philosophy, this treatment will fail to be appreciated and will not find an opportunity to do the good on a large scale that it has proven it can accomplish in the hands of many private practitioners. Nor will this Treatment be accepted as the standard treatment until the very profitable treatments for cancer and its allied conditions now employed will no longer be tolerated by the public.

The Koch method differs from other methods in being nondestructive to the tissues of the body. Even where it is injected locally, it does not produce a sore spot or injury when ordinary skill is employed. It has been used in the treatment of children without harm. In fact, a dose one thousand times greater than that usually employed has always proven harmless.

This Treatment has amply proven in the last twenty-two years that it really cures true and far-advanced cancer and a number of other supposedly incurable diseases, but this does not mean that every case can obtain full recovery. The prospects in each case depend upon the condition of the patient when treatment is instituted and upon the thoroughness and the intelligence with which the patient cooperates.

Naturally, it is easier to secure recoveries in the earlier periods of any disease, but our experience is confined nearly entirely to the advanced, “given-up”, desperate stages of those diseases that are classified as incurable ordinarily. In a very few instances where pneumonia, tuberculosis, and cancer had progressed to the terminal stage, when death was expected any minute, the trend was reversed and recovery fully established. This shows that nature sometimes has a hidden reserve which may win when properly helped, but no one should be stupid enough to expect such results to be the rule. Indeed, only too often the patient may give the impression that he possesses a measure of vitality, when, in reality, he is doomed and nothing can save him.

Each case is a problem unto itself and, though the general scheme of heredity, disease progress, and the recovery process show conformity in their characteristics, each patient must be studied individually and the Treatment applied with due consideration for the particular features in each case. The prognosis, therefore, is an individual matter also, and the prospects for recovery become a problem of the individual which can best be recognized by the progress made as time moves along. The element of cooperation is so important that no patient should be advised that he is certainly going to recover until he has earned the right to this prognosis through the progress made and the thoroughness of his cooperation; and, even then, carelessness or some other factor may intervene which will change a very hopeful outlook into an utter failure. No one, therefore, can guarantee to cure even the cases that one expects to recover easily; and, since it is absolutely impossible to cure everybody, no physician knows ahead of time which case is going to be a failure and which of the “hopeless” cases is going to surprise him with success. For this reason also, he should not confine his efforts to the easier cases only. The more advanced the stage of the disease, the more the patient is in need of help, whether the outcome be only a measure of relief or a full recovery.

No patient should take this Treatment unless he is prepared to give full cooperation to the doctor in charge. After he has taken the Treatment he should not follow the advice of friends unless this advice conforms to what is outlined for him by his physician. More dangerous is it indeed to follow the advice of some well meaning physician who neither understands this Treatment nor has all the data on the case. Meddling by the professional brethren is highly unethical and indecent and one who stoops so low might easily be guilty of ulterior motives or activated by envy. In the matter of this Treatment as in other affairs, loyalty and frankness bring the best rewards, and, unless the patient is whole-hearted and eager to follow the regime, he had better not start the Treatment at all. The regular methods are open to everyone; surgery, x-ray, and radium. There are plenty of specialists who are glad to be engaged to take a case. Do not choose the Koch method until you understand it and have decided that it is the most desirable procedure to adopt for your particular case from the standpoints of efficiency, safety, convenience, and expense.

THE NATURE OF THE KOCH TREATMENT

This Treatment is not an animal product, although Dr. Koch has demonstrated that the active agent exists in healthy animal tissues, principally the heart and brain. It is produced synthetically from pure chemicals. The substances used are very unstable and delicate in their structure. We believe that they are the catalysts of aerobic oxidations in the healthy body and that tissues that are deficient in them are susceptible to disease and have lost their natural immunity or power to burn up the poisons of germs, etc., that cause disease. Abundant natural immunity destroys germ and cancer-producing poisons by oxidizing them to harmless structures.

The purpose of the Koch Treatment is to restore the normal oxidizing power of the blood and tissues and thus to correct the very basis of disease. The success already attained proves that this conception can be put to work and produce results, and hence we believe it is correct. The amount of laboratory and clinical work required to bring the Treatment to its present state of efficacy was truly enormous and each sufferer who receives the Treatment now should realize what he owes in gratitude for the years of intensive effort that are now serving him.

Only recently are the scientists engaged in cancer research coming close to Dr. Koch’s investigations of more than twenty years ago. In the October, 1920, issue of the New York Medical Record you will find Dr. Koch’s paper reporting a group of humans who suffered with far advanced cancer in the given-up stage who were cured by the Koch Treatment. This report was made to demonstrate that the immunity principle was present in and could be extracted from animal tissues where it produced natural immunity. He named it TISSUE THROMBIN. Tissue Thrombin is the activated prothrombin of the blood and tissue cells and Dr. Koch has shown that its action resides in certain unsaturated or free valencies between carbon atoms and carbon and oxygen atoms; in other words, in active ethylene and active carbonyl groups. He obtained the same action from these Tissue Thrombin extracts as he obtained from his synthetic preparation produced to contain these same ethylene and carbonyl groups in their most curative form. The latter is his regular procedure. Now we learn from Look Magazine of January 28, 1941, that the researchers at Harvard, notably Dr. Louis Fieser, are investigating what activated prothrombin can do for cancer. Thus science of today is just reaching the threshold of Dr. Koch’s work of over twenty years ago. It is always unfortunate to be too far ahead of time because the current professional and scientific perceptions are not able to take in the new discovery and simply refuse to believe it is possible. The reaction is ridicule, animosity, and sometimes even the foulest of persecutions as history has so often demonstrated.

Research chemists are now also looking into another important principle which Dr. Koch discovered and put into use over twenty years ago: namely, the fundamental nature of the poisons that cause cancer and how to overcome them. Dr. Koch observed that these poisonous structures are destroyed by oxidation: namely, by the energy producing mechanism of each healthy cell. Thus in the cells where this property is splendidly normal, disease causing poisons are destroyed by being burned. This fact is now receiving confirmation and we read in Liberty Magazine of March 1, 1941, that the toxic element acquires a hydroxyl group when the body is able to resist the poison and not be made cancerous by it. Here again is confirmation of the Koch thesis, which has attempted for many years to bring the profession to realize, that basically the body’s protective mechanism is the oxidation process. But Dr. Koch has gone much farther. He worked out the probable mechanism whereby the healthy cells accomplish this changing of a cancer-producing substance into a harmless substance. He also worked out the method of producing the necessary agents to accomplish this protective change, even though the processes concerned have been hidden in the deepest mystery and are classified as unfathomable even today. The chemistry is explained in Dr. Koch’s book, The Chemistry of Natural Immunity, and for examples of its success in producing complete recoveries from fully proven far-advanced cancer you should read the Proceedings of the Cancer Commission appointed by the Government of the Province of Ontario, Canada. These Proceedings are set forth verbatim in a four hundred page book with explanatory remarks by D. H. Arnott, M.D., London, Ontario.

THE RECOVERY PROCESS

The recovery process is cyclical and the periodicity is expressed in units of three hours and its multiples of twelve, twenty-four, thirty-six, forty-eight, and eighty-four hour periods; and these periods are doubled into week and three-week periods which are also multiplied into three month periods. These latter periods, moreover, are multiplied into six-, nine-, and twelve-month cycles. Each cycle exhibits a positive and a negative phase. The positive phase is that phase when the patient feels better and appreciates his improvement, whereas, the negative phase exhibits an aggravation of his symptoms so that he feels worse generally, as well as at the locality especially affected. However, the negative phase is the more valuable of the two because it marks the time at which the recovery process is going on at its greatest speed. We are, therefore, very grateful when a patient can give a reaction twenty-four, forty-eight, or eighty-four hours after the Treatment and if he gives a fairly stiff reaction either during the third, sixth, ninth, or twelfth week or at the twenty-fourth, thirty-sixth, sixtieth, or seventy-second week.

There is no such thing as obtaining a cure by magic. The body has not only to burn up the poison causing the disease and with it its germs and diseased tissues, but the body must also replace the affected parts, with normal tissue and restore the injured organs so that they can again functionate normally. This Treatment has won the highest honors in this regard, since many times cases of cancer of the uterus in the advanced stages have been so thoroughly cured by this Treatment that the uterus was perfectly reconstructed in each instance and able to give birth to children. In this way also cancer of the throat has been so thoroughly cured that the vocal cords were reconstructed and the voice restored. Other organs have shared the same benefits and cases of paralysis have again regained good motion.

The time required for recovery varies greatly with different individuals, and with the conditions under which the Treatment is conducted. As a rule, in a vigorous person, the more malignant the disease the quicker the recovery, and conversely the slower the development of the disease, the longer the time required for recovery. We have seen cancer of the highest grade of malignancy clear up in three or four months and stay cured, while some other cases required two or three years to get well. It is always good to get away from the environment under which the disease developed when this can be done without hardship. The whole regimen should be set up so as to be favorable in every way. When we do this, the most rapid recoveries are made, and generally only one or two Treatments are needed. Thus we conclude also that where more than one Treatment is required some interfering factor may be present that should be identified. In this matter, the cooperation of the patient is essential. The time required for recovery, therefore, is not solely the responsibility of the physician. He will do his best; the patient must help him. They both win or lose together.

The matter of repeating the dose is important. We attempt to secure a full recovery on one dose whenever possible but, should another dose be needed, the time for the repetition should be accurately determined; and that requires some experience and a good understanding of the recovery process. For early repetition the 84th hour or 15th day is often appropriate, but the 9th, 12th, 24th, 36th, or 60th week may be the proper time in other cases. The rule is that so long as improvement is in progress the dose is never repeated.

We hope that, when sufficient time has elapsed for the profession to understand this work and when the number of recoveries has become so large that it will be impossible to spread falsehoods against the Treatment, the effort will be made to prevent the development of disease of all kinds through the treatment of the newly born or the treatment of children when their first exposure to the common fevers can be expected. Some doctors have expressed the belief that the treatment of the expectant mother during pregnancy should be practiced not only because childbirth is easier, but because the children seem to be healthier and to develop better both mentally and physically. A great many observations will be necessary to say accurately what can be accomplished in this direction, but the reports so far obtainable indicate how important this aspect of the work really promises to be.

Every patient who receives this Treatment and benefits from it owes a duty, not only to this effort, but to all similar advances in medicine, and since the public is the critic that the Medical Profession must face, it is up to the laity to encourage real progress and to insist on the suspension of obsolete unsuccessful practices.