The Metabolic Oncolytic Regimen is based on the seminal work of former NASA scientist Clarence Cone, Jr., Ph.D. My permutation of the oncolytic approach to treating solid tumors was first published during December 1996. Since that time this species of metabolic therapy has been further refined and modified so as to make achieving oncolysis more probable. This paper outlines my hypothesis and the revised (2001) and updated regimen in its entirety.

Stem-cell research is growing in laboratories around the globe despite whirling controversies on moral, religious, political and financial grounds.

One of the obvious benefits of these studies is that scientists are now learning in minute detail just how cells work — their underlying biology — which will enable them to better understand all kinds of diseases.

But many oppose the use of embryonic stem cells, claiming that it destroys life, and urge the use of adult stem cells instead. They ignore the fact that the former are derived from in-vitro fertility clinics — often donated by the parents — where hundreds of thousands of embryos are frozen indefinitely or discarded as medical waste. As Time magazine reported last year, “Fertility clinics destroy far more embryos than stem-cell research ever would, yet they are not controversial.”

What do we usually do when we get sick? Most of us go to the doctor or the medicine cabinet, get an injection or swallow a pill, take a "sick day" away from work and rest for a while.

A.B., a 77 year old businessman was paralyzed by a stroke in 2002. A year later he received an injection of umbilical cord derived stem cells. Within three weeks, A.B. had regained 80% of his strength and motor function in his previously weak and paralyzed arm and leg.

Personal experience is a powerful teacher. In March of 2001, I was preparing to take a trip to Australia to represent the United States in Senior Davis Cup competition. In the over-60 division, playing with pain is more the rule than the exception. But a couple of weeks before leaving, I developed a severe

I have four questions:

1. If there were no conflicts of interest or bias or questionable motives or axes to grind among the scientists who question Nicolson (including me), would Nicolson’s published PCR mycoplasma test still be inaccurate?

I tried to write "The Mycoplasma Myth: More Setbacks for CFS/GWS Research" in a way that focused on the message, not the messengers. I plan to continue to follow the high road, trying to avoid ad hominem attacks on any of my colleagues.