2
They took a group of fifty-five children with trisomy 21 and divided them into
twenty-four patients as controls and thirty-one patients who received treatment. Examinations were conducted by a team of additional specialists, including several
pediatricians, a neurologist, a psychologist, a cardiologist, and an ophthalmologist,
before the test began and every six months during it, with the exception of the
pediatricians, who performed monthly examinations. All the patients—controls and experimentees—were separated into two age
groups. Group One was twenty-eight children less than three-and-a-half years old,
and Group Two was twenty-seven children whose ages varied from three-and-a-
half to fourteen. The DMSO aminoacid therapy was administered by intramuscular
injections with different time rhythms in each group. Children in Group One were given injections every other day in a series of 90
days alternating with a month’s rest. All received a minimum of three series. The
dosage was adjusted to their body weight. Children in Group Two received daily intramuscular injections of 5 cc each
over 20 days alternating with pauses of 20 days. During the entire period they
were given the same amino acids in the form of one or two capsules per day but
without DMSO as an ingredient of the 
capsule. The total treatment for this second
group consisted of five series of 20 injections each—in all 100 injections of 5 cc
each over thirty weeks. The psychometric determinations in children of Group One were performed
according to the Gesell test, calculating the development quotient, which is the
relationship of motor development, language, and social adaptation according to
the child’s chronological age. Neurological development was determined byobserving the sense organs, coordination, muscle tone, and sphincter control. For
the older Group Two, psychometric measurements were performed with special
tests such as the Binet-Kulman test. Every 40 days the IQ was computed
according to the Gesell, Wieneland, and Binet tests. Additionally, laboratory tests
were carried out, including those for red corpuscles, hemoglobin, hematocrit, white
corpuscles, sedimentation, urine, hepatic function, amino acids in the blood, amino
acids in the urine, and others. Finally, photographs were taken before, during, and
after treatment to capture the psychic state and preponderant physical features of
the child and any noticeable changes. The evaluation of results took into account the development quotient and the
IQ. If the increase represented more than ten points, this was considered significant
clinical improvement. Analyses were made of the motor area, the adaptive area,
the language area for the utilization and comprehension of verbal communication,
and the social area. Comparison of the psychometric and motor changes observed in children
treated in Group One, under three-and-a-half-years old, with those of the control
group reveals the following differences:
To start with, the controls and the treated children had a mean average 
motor
index
 of fifty-six; after one year the controls’ motor index rose to fifty-eight
but the DMSO aminoacid treated children’s motor index rose to seventy-two,
except for six cases where there was really no significant variation. In the 
area of adaptation
, the averages of the controls were fifty-two at the
beginning and forty-nine at the end of the observation. The adaptation
averages of the treated group were fifty before and sixty-six after the series of
DMSO aminoacid injections. Averages in the 
language area
 for control cases showed fifty-six before and
fifty-four after the observation period. The treated patients started with a
language area average of fifty-two and ended with an average of fifty-eight,
four of them improving by more than ten points. In controls, the initial average in their 
social area
 was forty-five, which rose to
fifty a year later. The treated group started with a social average of forty and
at the end of the treatment this rose to sixty-four. The mimetic capacity and
expression of those treated improved noticeably; their environmental contact
was also noteworthy, reported the researchers. In children of Group Two who were older than three-and-a-half years, thefollowing results were obtained:
Stagnation was observed in the 
motor area
 of the controls. Their averages
were thirty-four before the test began and thirty-six a year later, when it
ended. On the other hand, the initial motor area average of thirty-eight for the
DMSO-treated group rose to forty-nine by the conclusion of the clinical trials. In the 
language area
, the controls were also stagnant, but the use of speech
improved in the treated group by sixteen points. In six of the sixteen treated
children comprehension improved, too. No significant variation was seen in the control group for 
graphic age. In the
group treated with DMSO therapy, their initial graphic age average of twenty-
four points rose to thirty-nine, which was a significant improvement. At the beginning of the observation the control group showed an average
intelligence quotient of thirty-four and a year later this mean average had dipped to
thirty-three. The treated group indicated an average IQ of twenty-nine, which had
shot up to forty by the time the treatment program ended. Besides these favorable
changes, this older treated group showed other improvements in statics, motor
coordination, and muscle tone. Two treated children achieved sphincter control
during this test period of one year. No serious side effects in the laboratory examinations were reported. Nor were
any seen in the periodic clinical examinations. Manuel Aspillaga, M.D., Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Director of the
Department of Genetics at the University of Chile, Calvo MacKenna Children’s
Hospital, led the research team consisting of pediatrician Mila Sanchez, M.D.,
geneticist Isabel Avendano, M.D., neuropsychiatrist Lucila Capdeville, M.D., and
geneticist Chislaine Morizon, M.D., who were with the same institution. These five
pioneering physicians stated: “It seems to us that DMSO aminoacid therapy in
trisomic children and children with severe mental retardation offers an evident
advance in the therapy of this syndrome. Fundamentally, it can be observed that
children aged less than three-and-a-half years react in the psychic sphere with
greater receptiveness to stimulation, showing a major interest in their environment;
there is an increase in their activity, and muscular tonus. A notable improvement is
also noted in the adaptive and social phase. Besides, muscular coordination and
statics also show a significant improvement. “We have not observed a correlation between the physical signs and the
development coefficient. We are of the opinion that the progress must be creditedto the treatment
,” the five physicians emphasized. “At the moment we dare not
make a prognosis relative to future intellectual levels. However, if the parameters
approach normality with this treatment, this is already a positive result and may
well be the starting point for future progress with this therapy. “In some of our patients treated later, not related with this work, we
administered higher doses, obtaining up to this moment more favorable results,”
said the researchers. “Finally, we wish to emphasize the fact that, although we
have not yet arrived at the ideal treatment, we have reached a new important stage
on our road in this difficult medical field, where no progress had been made in the
course of various decades.”
In another report to the New York Academy of Sciences, Ana Giller, M.D.,
children’s neuropsychiatrist at the Pirovano Hospital of Buenos Aires, and Maria
E.M. de Bernadow, M.D., Head of the Laboratory of Genetics, National
Department of Students’ Health of Argentina, presented a group of twenty-six
mentally retarded children ranging in age from seven to twenty. Thirteen had
received DMSO aminoacid therapy by mouth and by intramuscular injection. The
other thirteen served as controls and underwent only conventional treatment. The treated children received 5 cc of Merinex, the DMSO-aminoacid product,
intramuscularly three times a week in a series of twenty injections, alternating with
rest periods of 16 days between each series. During the intervals aminoacid
capsules without DMSO were orally administered in dosages of one to two per
day. Each patient was examined before and after 180 days of treatment. The IQ and
psychometric profiles were determined by a number of standards applied in
psychology such as the Binet-Simon test, standardized by Kuhlman, and the Wics
and Therman-Merril test. The age of maturity and organic lesions were determined
by the Bender test. The doctors reconciled the following parameters and evaluated
them:
1
. Visomanual coordination
2
. Dynamic coordination
3
. Postural control
4
. Control of the body itself
5
. Perceptive coordination
6
. Language age
7
. Dynamic coordination of the hands
8
. General dynamic coordination9
. Static coordination
10
. Speed
11
. Space organization
12
. Temporal structure
Upon analyzing the mean of variation of the estimated mental age from these
twelve tests practiced on the control group within the 180-day period, in
comparison with that obtained by the treated group, a definite difference emerged. There was a significant improvement in the psychometric profile of the children
treated with DMSO aminoacid therapy. It contrasted with the static state of the
control group where the variation was practically nonexistent when the
conventional approach was used. None of the children treated with the experimental compound showed any signs
of toxicity or intolerance. 3
THE NEW TREATMENT FOR LEARNING DISABILITIES
For the last three decades learning disorders have been viewed primarily from the
perspective of special education problems. During early investigations into the
causes of “brain-injured” children, a variety of labels have been leveled at these
youngsters. The more common names for their behavioral characteristics include
brain injury, brain damage, minimal brain damage, minimal brain dysfunction,
hyperkinesis, perceptual defects, dyslexia, hyperactivity, and many more. Still, no
single cause has conclusively been found, and treatment has differed with the
training and course of study of the diagnosing doctor, depending on whether the
doctor is a neurologist, psychologist, psychiatrist, internist, educator, or
nutritionist. But positive neurological findings have been reported in up to 85 percent of
the children with learning disabilities. In one study, 97 percent of the patients
showed evidence of brain dysfunction. In another study, a genetic component was
considered the cause and, in fact, at least five times more boys than girls have
learning disorders, which 
suggests that some are genetically sex-linked. Of the
51.5 million school-aged children in the United States, an estimated 10 percent
have some type of learning disability. The therapy for these disorders may be pharmacological, nutritional, or
environmental. Pharmacologically, learning disorders that are, in general,
considered brain damage are treated with cell-building substances such as aminoacids, phosphates, and potassium. They are administered in combination with
“carrying” solvents such as DMSO so as to actively interfere with the language
disorder, which may have a bearing on the recovery and/or development of speech. The addition of amino acids to DMSO develops and activates the functional
activity of the brain. A clinical research project was conducted by the Department of Abandoned
Children of the National Health Service of Chile, in 1969, under the direction of
the department head, Carlos Nassar, M.D. On a total of forty-four children of
school age with learning and developmental problems caused by low intellectual
capacity, Dr. Nassar used DMSO aminoacid therapy (Merinex) by injection and
by mouth. The personal histories of the children showed high percentages of retardation in
learning to walk, speak, in psychomotor development, and other actions. They had
unmotivated aggressiveness, rebellion and irritability, convulsive attacks, and
convulsive pathologies of the brain. Intellectual examinations before the
experimental trials indicated that they had IQs of between thirty to eighty-five. This IQ examination was repeated at three, six, and ten months during the course
of treatment with DMSO aminoacid therapy. A series of twenty intramuscular DMSO aminoacid injections, alternating with
the oral administration of capsules, proceeded. Almost all the children were
treated during periods ranging from six to ten months, except for six children in
which treatment was extended a year. In contrast with the poor results obtained using other methods of therapy, the
progress in mental capacity observed by Dr. Nassar for these DMSO-treated
children was extraordinary. He accomplished a heightened capacity for learning in
them in a relatively short time. More than 70 percent were classified “favorable”
responses. He saw an “increase of the IQ, an evident and accelerated progress in
basic achievements, an overall improvement of intellectual capacity, evident
progress in reading, writing, and mathematics, better coordination of movements
and improved manual skill, and a decrease of behavioral problems.” The doctor
also saw his patients gain better psychomotor control, and observed the elimination
of anger for no reason, a general reduction of irritability, and a lessening of
disobedience. Nassar stated unequivocally, “When analyzing the cases treated and evaluating
the clinical and psychometric tests, which were performed with the greatest care
and conscientiousness, we can conclude that Merinex is undoubtedly beneficial
and useful in the treatment of oligophrenic [mentally deficient] children; anincrease in their intellectual faculties and progress in basic achievements were
registered in a high percentage of the cases. During the clinical research, we
observed that the treatment not only increased the IQ but also has a beneficial
influence on behavior problems, improves psychomotor coordination, and
eliminates irritability, nervous erethism [abnormal excitement], unmotivated
aggressiveness, and rebelliousness.”
Additional investigations supported the Nassar study. For instance, at the
Department of Psychiatry, the University of Chile, neuropsychiatrist Azael Paz,
M.D., did research on fifty learning disabled children between the ages of five and
fifteen. They did not suffer from organic brain trouble, brain paralysis, congenital
brain damage, epilepsy, or pseudoneurotic mental retardation. Their problems
were only language disorders. DMSO aminoacid therapy (Merinex) was administered to a part of the group—
thirty patients—exclusively by mouth, in dosages of two or three capsules a day
during a period of six months. In the other twenty children injection treatment was
given intramuscularly, with 5 cc doses of three ampoules per week, until twenty
injections, alternating with a rest period of fifteen days, were completed. The
injections were then resumed with the same time rhythm and duration as the first
cycle until an average of six months of treatment was reached. During the rest
periods, the DMSO aminoacid oral treatment was also given in daily doses of two
or three capsules, according to the age of the child. Dr. Paz reported that there are excellent possibilities for stimulating and
accentuating the development, the psychic evolution, and learning of children with
the help of this therapy, which activates and stimulates the energetic oxidative
metabolism of the brain. The neuropsychiatrist noted a gradual development of the
faculty of greater awareness, changes and progress in the moral attitude of the
child, the unfolding of the personality, the dawning of self-criticism, and the
satisfaction of establishing his own personal identity. The favorable results reported in this clinical study of DMSO for learning
disabilities were summed up by the researcher in the following way:
1
. Disappearance of mental lethargy. 2
. Evidence of sensorial reactions. 3
. Disappearance of automatic movements. 4
. Disappearance of inertia, passivity, and negativity. 5
. Growing interest and initiative in tasks and activities. 6
. Improvement of the physiognomic expression (use of facial features to revealcharacter) and of the spoken language. 7
. Lucid activity, group contact, and disappearance of unprovoked
aggressiveness. 8
. Losing shyness and developing self-esteem. 9
. Successful training to carry out chores, to shop, eat, and dress without help,
etc. 10
. Learning to read and write and to do homework. Paz concluded: “The therapy with Merinex, injections and capsules, has led to
a rapid biopsychological development and to the evolution of the intellectual
faculties of the children, making them capable for school learning.” The
therapeutic response was quicker and more efficacious in the group subject to
treatment with injections and capsules than in the group treated exclusively with
capsules alone. Added to this extensive and convincing South American study, physicians in
Spain confirmed, in late 1982, that children victimized by Down’s syndrome
undergo a positive social adjustment when they are administered DMSO. 4
REVERSING SENILE DEMENTIA AND OTHER FORMS OF
PSYCHO-ORGANIC DECAY
In the brain of a young healthy adult, there are about 12 billion neurons, the cells
that send nerve impulses through the body. As part of the aging process each day,
the brain loses about 100,000 neurons. They get used up and die and psycho-
organic decay eventually sets in when enough neurons have been lost. Geriatric specialists estimate that 15 percent of people sixty-five to seventy-
five years old and 25 percent of those seventy-five and older are suffering from
senile dementia, one of the forms of psycho-organic (PSO) decay. Thus, senility or
dementia is in no way the same as aging, for if you can prevent PSO decay you
will avoid senile dementia, but will continue to age. Senility or dementia is the
term applied to destructive changes in the functioning cells of the brain. It is a
brain disease and a mental disease. While there are senile physical changes as
well, they are not always present in the brain of the senile person. 5
DMSO aminoacid therapy and DMSO in combination with vasoactive
substances have been proven beneficial in the treatment of senility or dementia and
other forms of psycho-organic decay. Gustavo Munizaga, M.D., Professor ofNeurology at Chile University, conducted an experiment in July 1970 using these
two types of DMSO compounds. Merinex and the vasoactive DMSO, called
“Ipran,” which is also not approved by the FDA for use in the United States, were
given to 104 elderly people suffering from PSO decay. These people were divided
into five groups, according to their dominant pathology:
1
. PSO decay caused by cerebral vascular arteriosclerosis. 2
. PSO decay caused by senility. 3
. PSO decay after a stroke. 4
. PSO decay as a consequence of a head injury. 5
. PSO decay due to a degenerative disease such as parkinsonism,
hyperthyroidism, epilepsy, and others. The patients with mental decay in the last stage of advanced age treated by Dr.
Munizaga received Merinex and Ipran, both orally and by injection. As a general
rule, treatment began with intramuscular injections, alternating Merinex one day
and Ipran the next, or administering one ampoule of each simultaneously, mixed in
the syringe, until a cycle of twenty injections was completed. On the days when
the patients received no injections, they took two capsules of Merinex and one
capsule of Ipran. The DMSO aminoacid therapy and DMSO combined with vasoactive
substances were of remarkable efficacy in the recovery of patients with PSO
decay, the neurologist reported. He established that the therapeutic response was
quicker when both medicines were administered simultaneously by injection and
by mouth. Munizaga said, “The DMSO aminoacid therapy is undoubtedly valuable
in the treatment of numerous organic cerebral diseases. At the same time, thanks to
the improved cerebral blood irrigation achieved by DMSO used in combination
with vasoactive substances, a highly favorable effect on the psychic and somatic
functions of senile dementia patients was achieved.”
Another study was performed in Chile on 100 patients of both sexes suffering
from cerebrovascular diseases such as infarct, cerebral embolism, hardening of the
arteries of the brain, and other conditions. Jorge Grismali, M.D., Chief of the
Clinic of the Department and Extraordinary Professor of Neurology, Salvador
Hospital, and Luis Varela Barrios, M.D., 
Neurologist in that same department,
employed a therapeutic method using Ipran ampoules and capsules. The patients
were senile as well as victims of one of the cerebrovascular diseases (CVD). In 70
percent of the cases, CVD was accompanied by high blood pressure, demonstrablein the accessible arteries. The DMSO therapy was given both orally and intramuscularly. The dose was
one intramuscular injection—administered slowly—each day, until twenty
ampoules had been given. At the same time, one capsule was dispensed in the
morning and another in the afternoon so that the patient could swallow a divided
double dose. After the first twenty injections, the ampoules were administered
every other day until another total of thirty injections was completed. In this
second series, two Ipran capsules were swallowed daily, and no more than two
injections were given each week. Drs. Grismali and Barrios summed up their therapeutic results for the DMSO
treatment of CVD with atherosclerosis and high blood pressure in the following
manner:
Good
74.35 percent
Fair
21.77 percent
Zero
3.88 percent
The two neurologists reported that “recovery from the general symptoms was
positive; there were favorable changes which were reflected in a feeling of well
being, the recovery of agility, changes of mood from depressed to gay,
improvement of sleeping, and clearer speech. As regards the ‘focal’ results,
accelerated recovery from hemiplegia and hemiparesia was registered. A speedier
recovery of speech in cases of defined or indicated aphasia took place.”CHAPTER 11
The DMSO-Cancer Connection
In April, 1974, a fifty-six-year-old Exxon Oil Corporate Executive, Joe B. Floyd,
now of Spring, Texas, found himself hemorrhaging from the rectum. Realizing that
this was an unhealthy sign, Mr. Floyd consulted with his company’s industrial
physician, C. Hunter Montgomery, M.D. Dr. Montgomery’s physical examination
revealed that his patient was suffering from a deadly form of cancer of the colon—
adenocarcinoma. Adenocarcinoma is among the most malignant of cancers. Each year, it kills
approximately 9,500 Americans. The cancer occurs in all age groups, but the
incidence increases with age. While it usually involves the duodenum portion of
the small intestine and sometimes the ileum, producing early obstruction, pain,
bleeding, and rapid weight loss, Mr. Floyd’s adenocarcinoma had infiltrated the
rectosigmoid of the large intestine. The prediction as to the duration, course, and outcome of the disease depends
on the degree of bowel wall involvement and the presence of regional lymph node
involvement and distant metastases. Unluckily for Mr. Floyd, his adenocarcinoma
had spread to the lymph nodes. They had turned rubbery. It had also metastasized
rapidly to the liver. Pressure symptoms developed from the expansion of the
lymph nodes in the abdominal cavity so that gastric upset occurred. Weight loss,
fever, night sweats, and debilitation were weakening the patient, indicating that his
cancer was spreading. Dr. Montgomery referred Joe Floyd to colon surgeon Wade Harris, M.D., of
Houston, who removed thirteen inches of the patient’s large colon and the lymph
nodes in his peritoneum where the cancer had spread. Dr. Harris advised Mr.
Floyd to take chemotherapy, for it was certain that in a matter of only a few
months, the adenocarcinoma would occur somewhere else. The surgeon also
mentioned that his own wife had the identical condition. Mrs. Harris suffered with
adenocarcinoma 
and was then taking chemotherapy at the M.D. Anderson Cancer
Institute, a giant hospital complex in Houston. Dr. Harris had wanted Mr. Floyd to go through the same chemotherapy
program as Mrs. Harris, but the man agonized over this decision and finallyrefused. He went home after his colon surgery on a Saturday morning. He had
viewed a television documentary two years before, presented by newsman Ron
Stone of KHOU-TV Houston, depicting cancer cures by another Houston
physician, E.J. Tucker, M.D. (now deceased). Mr. Floyd was keen to investigate
this alternative treatment. “Then the next Monday morning my wife and I called on Dr. Tucker and after
a lot of hard persuasion, he agreed to give me his treatment on an experimental
basis,” explained Mr. Floyd. “A dying man can make a pretty good argument to
keep on living. Within six weeks, Dr. Harris’s wife was dead from taking
chemotherapy. But I was back at work in downtown Houston at the Exxon Building
and taking treatments every other day at the doctor’s office. I had no nausea or any
of the symptoms usually accompanying chemotherapy. After approximately
eighteen months, my CEA tests were far below normal and Dr. Tucker dismissed
me as cured. I was to come by for a checkup every thirty days. Now we make a
check every three or four months and my CEA is always below normal.” CEA
stands for 
c
arcinogenic 
e
mbyronic 
a
ntigen, a blood test for cancer cell activity in a
person with a malignancy. Mr. Floyd’s CEA has dropped from a high of eighteen
to zero (normal) today. When we last spoke together, on May 16, 1989, J.B. Floyd at seventy-one was
retired from Exxon and was the wealthy owner of twelve Texas oil wells. He
received gratification as a retailer in his small health food store, bringing good
nutrition to his tiny Texas town. Being a health food entrepeneur was his hobby
and source of complete satisfaction; being alive and well was the answer to his
prayers, which he attributed to the research of Dr. E.J. Tucker. Mr. Floyd received his treatment as a result of a discovery made by Tucker in
1966, which until now has been ignored by the cancer medical establishment. M.D. Anderson Hospital, among the largest cancer therapeutic research centers in the
world, situated just down the street from Tucker’s office, doesn’t even experiment
with this treatment because half of its components include DMSO as part of the
therapeutic compound. The decision to ignore Tucker’s compound is mostly based on politics and
economics. Administrators of M.D. Anderson Hospital are aware of where the
bulk of the hospital’s money comes from. It operates on large government grants
and some private contributions. The administrators 
are likely worried that if the
medical staff went against the policy of the Food and Drug Administration by
using DMSO for an unapproved purpose, the hospital’s grants would be in
jeopardy.Indeed, the FDA knows very well about this treatment’s success for certain
forms of cancer. FDA officials personally met with Tucker and Floyd to study the
doctor’s DMSO cancer therapy. “[In] the first part of March 1978 a group of
doctors from New York City called and wanted Dr. Tucker to come and bring his
medicine and show them how to use it,” said J.B. Floyd. “Dr. Tucker called me
and asked if I would accompany him and tell my story.”
Floyd agreed to go anywhere, anytime to bring information about the treatment
that saved his life to the medical community. Before leaving for the Houston
airport, Tucker received another telephone call from K.C. Pani, M.D., of the
Division of Anti-Infective Drug Products, Bureau of Drugs, Food and Drug
Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, Maryland,
to please come by the FDA on the way to New York and bring him up to date. Tucker had numerous records of cures, X-ray films, and slides to show. Doctor and patient flew to Rockville where Tucker presented his case
histories. When they came to Floyd’s record, Dr. Pani asked, “How long did this
one last, three months?”
Tucker replied, “He is sitting down in the lobby.”
Pani said, “I want to see this dead man.”
They sought out Mr. Floyd, and he told his story. Then the FDA official,
visibly impressed, said he would be in touch with Tucker soon. He also mentioned
that he was in contact with Dr. Stanley Jacob of Oregon and that he was
monitoring the use of DMSO. About one week later the drug was approved for the
treatment of interstitial cystitis. Nothing further was done to follow up its use in
cancer, except that Tucker received a request from the FDA for “more research.”
Dr. Jacob also is acquainted with Tucker’s work. In fact, he telephoned
Tucker a few days before the Mike Wallace 
60 Minutes
 show on CBS-TV to
check out progress on the cancer treatment. Jacob plays down the DMSO-cancer
connection, because he has enough trouble getting the substance recognized for all
of its other special uses. He doesn’t want to have to fight off the label of “cancer
quackery” as well. DMSO-HEMATOXYLON ACTION ON ANIMALS
By age seventy-eight, Eli Jordon Tucker, Jr., M.D., had done over 1,000 
bone
fusions for arthritic backs, ankles, and other joints as an orthopedic surgeon
practicing for fifty-two years in Houston. Dr. Tucker’s true love was medical
research, however, and one of his major discoveries was the technique for graftingbone from one animal species to another. The drug company, E.R. Squibb and
Sons of Princeton, New Jersey, purchased the patent rights to his discovery and
spent half-a-million dollars developing the method about twenty years ago. Dr.
Tucker also perfected an oral treatment with vital bone substances for the
correction of bone degenerative conditions. For half a century, he was a respected
Fellow of the American College of Surgeons, a member of the Orthopedic Board
of the International College of Surgeons, an honorary life member of the American
Medical Association, and he was one of the few orthopedists in the State of Texas
to be presented with the “Award of Merit” by the American Medical Association
for his research work on bone. Dr. Tucker performed his bone grafting experiments with calf bones that he
acquired from a nearby slaughterhouse, the Houston Meat Packing Company. While purchasing specimens, he noticed the butchers were accepting for slaughter
white-faced cattle that were eaten up with cancer of the face. In many cases, eye
cancer spreading down the animal’s muzzle was disintegrating the entire face. Even
so, the meat inspectors and veterinarians passed these cattle for human
consumption provided there was no cancer metastasis to the animal’s internal
organs. It occurred to Tucker in 1962 that there might be such a thing as cancer
antibodies. Currently scientists are seeking the same thing through studying
interferon, the much-publicized antivirus substance. Aside from his research on
developing a bone paste for grafting purposes, Dr. Tucker inaugurated an
additional project. He did some laboratory work on the blood of cancerous cows,
looking for cancer antibodies. His procedure entailed bleeding the animals after
they were slaughtered and making gamma globulin from the blood. Then, he
injected the gamma globulin into cancer-ridden rats and mice. The substance
seemed to retard some of the rodent tumors, specifically the adenocarcinomas and
others involving granulomatosis (a condition marked by tumors of the pink tissue
that is formed during wound healing) such as lymphosarcoma (lymphoma). It did
not affect fibrosarcoma, melanoma, and some other types. He required a dye for marking the tumors in order to better see any growth
alterations. The dye had to stain the tumor sufficiently and at the same time he
gave the gamma globulin injection. Tucker was disappointed by most of the dyes
he tried. With methylene blue, 
everything in the tissue field became overly
darkened. Picric acid colored all the tissues yellow. The red coloring safranine
stain had no effect on the tumor. But hematoxylon turned out to be the perfect dye
because it stained the cancer one color, the normal cells another color. It is amultiple-coloring stain. Hematoxylon is a long-established dye, used by biologists for over 100 years
as a pathologic marker for animal cells, particularly because of its affinity for
nucleic acids. Hematoxylon’s formula, C
16
H
14
O
6
, has two loose hydrogen bonds
so that it oxidizes readily to a red substance known as hematein. This property of
rapid oxidation is often used as an indicator in chemistry for alkaloid titrations. Thus, hematoxylon is a substance commonly employed by physical scientists. It is also used in medicine as an astringent for the relief of diarrhea and for the
treatment of urinary infections, because the presence of the dye is rapidly excreted
in the urine. The human dose recommended in the past has been from 0.6 to 2
grams. The one drawback for Tucker with adapting hematoxylon for staining tissue
was that it is a resin derived from the bark of the logwood tree. The resin is
insoluble in ordinary laboratory solvents such as alcohol and ether. The dye has a
special nucleus similar to the nucleic acids, the master molecules of life that
cannot be duplicated synthetically. When DMSO came into use around 1963, Tucker found that getting the dye to
go into solution was no longer a problem. DMSO’s high solvent properties
combined with an amazing affinity for hematoxylon, dissolving almost its own
weight of the dye, made it an ideal substance for his purposes. Not only that,
DMSO did not alter the hematoxylon at all and carried the chemical directly into
the tumor. There was good dispersion; only the cancer cells were stained and
stood out under the microscope and in gross dissection. To his amazement, Tucker discovered he could dissolve 25 grams of
hematoxylon powder into 62 cc of DMSO liquid, an exceedingly high
concentration. In a medical paper published in the January 16, 1968, issue of
International Surgery
, in collaboration with A. Carrizo, M.D., Director of the
National Cancer Control and Cancer Center for the Republic of Panama, Panama
City, he described how hematoxylon dissolved in DMSO was used in recurrent
neoplasms. 1
Drs. Tucker and Carrizo injected into dogs a solution of 25 grams of
hematoxylon dissolved in 75 cc of DMSO as a parenteral intravenous solution
with 5 percent dextrose in saline and normal saline to do an acute toxicity study. They observed no abnormalities in the living animals over 
a month’s time, and
autopsies showed no changes in the animals’ livers, kidneys, gastrointestinal tracts,
hearts, bone marrow, lungs, or brains. No dye was present in any of the sectioned
tissues. High doses of DMSO without hematoxylon that had been given into thejugular veins of healthy dogs did cause acute respiratory failure, shock, and death
in three of four dogs. The combination of the dye and the solvent proved to be
much less toxic than DMSO alone. Albino rats could tolerate four times the
amount of the combination hematoxylon solution than the DMSO alone. Experimental animals with both induced and spontaneous tumors were treated
with the combination solution. The induced tumors included a methyl
cholantranine transplant tumor (fibrosarcoma) and adenocarcinoma of the breast
(Walker’s tumor) in albino rats. The fibrosarcoma regressed somewhat but not
entirely. The adenocarcinoma was not affected by the intravenous injection of
hematoxylon and DMSO until a small dose of androgen caused its rapid regression
in practically 100 percent of the rats. Spontaneous tumors in dogs, horses, and cattle were treated with the DMSO-
hematoxylon solution. In some cases, Tucker performed the service out of a
feeling of pity for the suffering animal. For instance, William Daniel, former
Governor of Guam, one of Tucker’s friends, phoned and told the doctor: “E.J., I
have a cancerous dog on my ranch who is suffering terribly. Could you do
anything to help him, or should I have him put to death?”
“I’d love to try,” answered Tucker. “I’ll send my technician to pick up the dog
right away.”
The technician brought the animal to Tucker’s veterinarian, Dr. Collins, for
examination. The vet diagnosed that large-cell lymphosarcoma was permeating the
dog’s body. “The poor animal is choking to death from the tumors in his throat,
and he has large tumors all over his body,” said Dr. Collins over the telephone. “I
don’t think he’ll live long enough to be transported to your laboratory.”
Tucker said, “Transfuse him, give him some blood fast, and let me have him
for treatment.”
The physician took the dog, which was barely alive, into the laboratory and
injected DMSO-hematoxylon solution intravenously. His technician took over the
work and gave the injections daily. Within two weeks, all the tumors had
disappeared. It seemed like a miracle to the technician. Upon Tucker’s examination of the dog, he found that all the large-cell
lymphosarcoma tumors had completely regressed. The huge masses in the neck
and over the whole body of the animal had gone away, and the dog came out of the
treatment completely cured. The dog was thriving at the laboratory when an unlucky accident caused his
death. He ate a large quantity of some meat contaminated with Malathion, an
insecticide poison. Tucker performed an autopsy, which revealed no active cancercells in the vestigial remains of the previously large lymphomatous nodules. Many
ghost cells—cells that were formerly cancer but weren’t any kind of cells anymore
—appeared in the microscopic sections. Not a single distinguishable cancer cell
remained in the dog. The Tucker research organization put out word for another lymphosarcomatous
dog, which came from a veterinarian hospital. This animal had a small-cell
lymphosarcoma. Injections of DMSO-hematoxylon for this dog were less effective
than for the first. Its tumors regressed somewhat but not altogether, and the animal
died two months after the withdrawal of treatment from a perforated heart brought
about by heartworm infestation. Small-cell lymphosarcoma failed to respond to the
DMSO-hematoxylon solution as dramatically as had large-cell lymphosarcoma. A wild horse with osteogenic sarcoma on the right hind leg was treated by
Tucker with local applications of the solution. He sprayed on 25 cc of diluted dye
and DMSO in 500 cc of normal saline and glucose. The tumor disappeared after
treatment continued for approximately a year. The animal lived for at least five
more years with no evidence of recurrence locally or by metastasis. An Arabian stallion with generalized malignant melanomas in and about the
anus and under the tail was treated with 10 cc of the solution in 5 percent dextrose
in saline twice weekly for three months. The tumors lodged under the skin
regressed and then remained static for two more years. A small squamous-cell carcinoma of the eye in a white-faced cow was treated
by local injection of 15 percent DMSO-hematoxylon solution in normal saline and
injected directly into the conjunctival sac daily for three months. The squamous-
cell tumor completely disappeared and did not recur. Tucker determined the human dosage of this DMSO-hematoxylon solution by
trial and error intravenous injections into 250-gram rats and 25-pound dogs. He
lowered the dose seven times and eventually arrived at the correct figure for its
parenteral administration to humans. Made from 25 grams of hematoxylon and 75
cc of DMSO combined, 1 cc of the resultant solution is ideal for each 75 pounds
of body weight. This material has been administered to people intravenously, intra-
arterially, and topically. ANTI-CANCER SOLUTION TRIALS ON DYING PATIENTS
Tucker told his hospital associates of his findings. Jack Bevil, M.D., of Houston,
approached him about trying this new solution for a patient dying from inoperable
fibrosarcoma. The woman was critically ill and comatose. Her husband listened toTucker tell his story of animal cancer treatment and asked the doctor to try to save
his wife. Tucker sat by this woman’s bedside and gave the intravenous infusion
exceedingly slowly and cautiously, taking six hours the first time. He gave her
weeks of treatment, and her tumor began to recede. When it had shrunk to a small
enough size, Dr. Bevil took her back to the operating room and removed it. The
woman lived on in Houston uneventfully for two more years and then moved to
San Antonio where Tucker lost track of her progress. Tucker performed a series of hematoxylon-DMSO intravenous injections in an
extensive, privately financed research project to record the effect of his treatment
on different types of cancer. Table 11.1
 shows his results. Analysis of this series of thirty-seven preterminal American cases of
malignancy reveals that the treatment with dimethyl sulfoxide and hematoxylon
therapy when combined with current anti-cancer agents resulted in condition
improvement in 70.5 percent of the patients. These agents included surgery,
radiation, and the anti-cancer drugs 5-fluorouracil (5FU), methotrexate, and
thiotepa. Improvement of the patient was gained in only 5.4 percent of those cases
treated with the anti-cancer agents alone and no DMSO-hematoxylon solution. When DMSO-hematoxylon solution was administered alone, condition
improvement jumped to 38.1 percent. This was largely a reduction in symptoms
with the exception of one case of leiomyosarcoma (case number 1 in the table in
which the tumor regressed and was surgically removed). The most striking results observed by Tucker were in two cases of large-cell
lymphosarcoma (number 17 in the table and an uncharted Panamanian patient) and
two cases of malignant giant-cell tumor of the bone (numbers 10 and 14 shown in
the table). There was complete regression in both of the cases of large-cell
lymphosarcoma with no recurrence up to a time well beyond the date of Tucker’s
published report in June 1968. One of these DMSO-hematoxylon-treated patients
died ten years later of a heart attack and the other is still living today. There was
also 
complete regression in one case of malignant giant-cell tumor of
approximately one-third of the femur that underwent new bone regeneration. Tucker did not publish more papers on the subject of hematoxylon combined
with DMSO as a treatment for cancer because of continual colleague criticism of
his use of a non-approved drug. He was expelled from the staffs of two hospitals
for administering this treatment. The expulsions were separate actions that hurt him
deeply. Despite his emeritus status among his peers as the grand old gentleman oforthopedic surgery, this did not stop vindictive reactions to his use of DMSO for
cancer treatment. Consequently, he provided treatment only very selectively—
when the patient was obviously preterminal and in a destitute state. His fees for
cancer therapy were ridiculously low, if he charged any fees at all. Tucker didn’t
want any more publicity about his anti-cancer therapy. My report is given here
because I believe it is about time the medical community, especially oncologists,
took hold of this treatment and explored it further for the purpose of aiding those
one out of three suffering Americans who will eventually come down with cancer,
and one out of five who will die from it. On an ironic note, Dr. Tucker himself came down with a form of cancer that
would have responded to his DMSO-hematoxylon treatment, but before he could
administer it to himself, he fell into a coma. No one had access to his formula
except the author of this book, and I did not know Dr. Tucker’s attendants needed
it to save his life. Dr. Tucker died only a few months before this book was first
published. Its updating and republication may save lives—I hope so! HOW TO PREPARE AND USE THE HEMATOXYLON-DMSO
SOLUTION
To prepare a solution of hematoxylon dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide for anti-
cancer application, obtain from almost any chemical company 25 grams of
powdered hematoxylon HX-0025. Into an 80 cubic centimeter (cc) volume bottle
containing the hematoxylon powder, pour DMSO, stirring continuously, until
DMSO fills the bottle by three fourths. Stopper the solution and shake by hand or,
better, by machine until all powder is completely dissolved. No solid particles
should be showing on the bottom of the bottle after it is left standing. Then, fill the
bottle with the balance of the DMSO and shake again. The hematoxylon-DMSO
solution is now ready for therapeutic use against cancer. To insure safety during treatment, start by using only .5 cc of the solution
injected into a 250-milliliter (ml) bottle of 5 percent dextrose water. For diabetic
patients, substitute normal saline for the dextrose. Increase the treatment solution
concentration by one-tenth daily until the doctor administering the treatment
determines that his patient’s tolerance level is reached. Beyond tolerance will tend
to cause the patient to go into a high fever about 35 minutes after the treatment
ends. For this reason, it is advisable for the patient to always carry either Demerol
or 50-milligram tablets of Benadryl to counteract the intolerance.Table 11.1
 Hematoxylon-DMSO Treatment on Different Types of Cancer
Patient Number
 : 1. Age
 : 66
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Leiomyosarcoma (inoperable) of abdomen
Surgery
 : 3 unsuccessful attempts at removal. One successful. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Removal of necrotizing tumor. Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 10/23/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 50 injections. Tumor regressed and was removed
June 1966. Present Status
 : November 1967 Patient still surviving. Patient Number
 : 2. Age
 : 27
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Chondroosteosarcoma. Terminal
Surgery
 : 2/10/65 Biopsy
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : None
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 4/11/65
l
1
⁄
2
 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 48 injections. Tumor regressed for 3 months. Present Status
 : Died 12/24/65. Patient Number
 : 3. Age
 : 73
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Adenoca. of prostate and bladder. Generalized
metastasis. Preterminal
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : None
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 11/5/65
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IVTotal Dosage and Response
 : 56 injections. Tumor regressed for 4 months. Present Status
 : Died 5/12/66. Patient Number
 : 4. Age
 : 72
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of neck with metastasis
Surgery
 : Multiple resections of neck. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Max. radiation only. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Retardation of local tumor growth
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 11/12/65
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 60 injections. Tumor regressed for 5 months. Present Status
 : Died 8/66. Patient Number
 : 5. Age
 : 58
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Adenoca. of breast with extensive metastasis—
Grade 4
Surgery
 : Radical mastectomy. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : No chemotherapy, Max. X-radiation at
operative site. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : None
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 11/26/65
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 28 injections. Tumor regressed for 3 months. Present Status
 : Died 4/1966. Patient Number
 : 6. Age
 : 84
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Large fungating adenoca. of breast with
metastasis to lung
Surgery
 : Simple mastectomy. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : NoneDate of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 1/5/66
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV. Local application of 15% H-D.M.S.O. Total Dosage and Response
 : 47 injections. Local applications 7 months. Complete regression of lung metastasis. Present Status
 : Died 8/5/66. Heart disease. Patient Number
 : 7. Age
 : 52
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of pelvis with large metastases
Surgery
 : Pan-hysterectomy. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Max. radiation, 5 F.U. 1800 mg total
dosage. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 1/5/66
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 27 injections. Complete regression of metastatic
masses. Present Status
 : 2/7/66 in complete remission. Died 5/3/66 of drug addiction. Patient Number
 : 8. Age
 : 51
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of lung with metastasis to neck
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None—Max. X-radiation to lungs. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 2/7/66
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 54 injections. Remission for 6 months. Present Status
 : Died 10/66. Patient Number
 : 9. Age
 : 86
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Adenoca. of breast with fungating postop. area
Surgery
 : Radical mastectomy.Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Max X-radiation to operative site. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Fungating growth at operative site
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 10/7/66
Local application to fungating area only. 15% H-D.M.S.O. Total Dosage and Response
 : Daily for 8 months. Complete relief of pain. Lesion
regressed. Odor subsided. Present Status
 : Died 6/67. Heart disease. Patient Number
 : 10. Age
 : 60
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Malignant giant-cell tumor of femur
Surgery
 : None. Biopsy only. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Total F.U. 8,810 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 10/5/66
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 102 injections. Complete remission. No tumor
formation by biopsy or x-ray. Present Status
 : 10/9/67 date of complete remission. Patient Number
 : 11. Age
 : 52
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. ulcerating of face
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Max. local X-radiation. Total F.U. 1,120
mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Moderate
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 4/5/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV. Local application of 15% H-D.M.S.O. Total Dosage and Response
 : 72 injections. Local applications daily for 7 months. Complete relief of pain and odor. Present Status
 : 11/9/67 tumor continues to regress. Patient Number
 : 12. Age
 : 50Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Adenoca. of prostate. Metastasis to vertebrae
Surgery
 : Suprapubic cystotomy. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : None
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 54 injections. Prostatic tumor regressed. Present Status
 : 7/17/67. discharged 11/15/67 still in remission. Patient Number
 : 13. Age
 : 45
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of mouth. Preterminal
Surgery
 : Radical neck resection and hemimandibulectomy. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Total F.U. 1,600 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Moderate
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 4/2/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 36 injections. Remission. Present Status
 : Dismissed 8/67. 11/15/67 still in remission. Patient Number
 : 14. Age
 : 24
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Malignant giant cell tumor of upper 
1
⁄
3
 left femur,
advanced
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Max. X-radiation. Total F.U. 4,800 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 5/2/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 72 injections. Tumor regressing rapidly, with bone
regeneration. Present Status
 : 11/16/67 patient continued to improve. Patient Number
 : 15.Age
 : 45
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Mixed tumor of uterus (undifferentiated)
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Total F.U. 400 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 3/4/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV. Local application of 15% H-D.M.S.O. Total Dosage and Response
 : 16 injections. Pain, hemorrhage and odor ceased. Present Status
 : Died 4/2/67
Patient Number
 : 16. Age
 : 44
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Adenoca. of breast. Preterminal
Surgery
 : Radical mastectomy. Exploratory laparotomy. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Max. X-radiation. Total F.U. 1,600 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 9/14/67
1 
1
⁄
2
 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 27 injections. Complete regression of abdominal
masses. Present Status
 : 11/22/67 patient continues to improve. Patient Number
 : 17. Age
 : 63
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Large-cell lymphosarcoma. Generalized
metastasis
Surgery
 : Splenectomy. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Total Cytoxan 1,050 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Fair
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 8/5/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 21 injections. Complete regression. Present Status
 : 11/23/67 complete regression.Patient Number
 : 18. Age
 : 50
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of cervix. Preterminal
Surgery
 : No surgery. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : None
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 8/5/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV. Local application of 15% H-D.M.S.O. Total Dosage and Response
 : 12 injections. Remission. Present Status
 : 11/10/67 progress continues. Patient Number
 : 19. Age
 : 40
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of cervix
Surgery
 : No surgery. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : No radiation. No drug therapy
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 10/24/67
2
1
⁄
2
 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV. Local application daily by vaginal pack 15% H-D.M.S.O. Total Dosage and Response
 : 5 injections. Regression of pain, odor and
hemorrhage. Present Status
 : 11/9/67 patient continues to improve. Patient Number
 : 20. Age
 : 48
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Adenoca. of cervix advanced
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 10/2/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV Local application by vaginal pack 15% H-D.M.S.O. Total Dosage and Response
 : 12 injections. Patient has relief of odor, pain and
bleeding. Present Status
 : 10/11/67 patient continues to improve.Patient Number
 : 21. Age
 : 50
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of cervix. Preterminal
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : None
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 9/7/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 13 injections. Patient free of pain and softening of
parametrium. Present Status
 : 10/11/67 patient continues to improve. Patient Number
 : 22. Age
 : 68
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of soft palate
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : M.T.X., I.A. Total dose 200 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Fair
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 5/25/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 36 injections. Had remission and dismissed from
hospital. Had recurrence 1 mo. later. Present Status
 : Released after 24 injections, with another remission & same
remission as of 11/10/67. Patient Number
 : 23. Age
 : 60
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Adenoca. of stomach. Inoperable
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Total F.U. 800 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : None
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 10/9/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 24 injections. Patient free of pain and able to eatwithout pain. No hemorrhage. Present Status
 : 11/9/67 continues in state of symptomatic remission. Patient Number
 : 24. Age
 : 56
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Adenoca. of bladder and prostate. Surgery
 : Suprapubic cystostomy. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None—M.X.T. Total dose 200 mg. F.U. total 2,800 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Moderate
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 9/19/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 22 injections. Patient dismissed from hospital in
remission. Present Status
 : 10/11/67 progress of patient continues. Patient Number
 : 25. Age
 : 22
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Advanced adenoca. of ovary, with metastasis to
abdomen. Surgery
 : Exploratory and biopsy only. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : No. radiation. Total thio-tepa I.A. 200 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Fair
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 8/15/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 23 injections. Palpable rumor reduced 50% of
original size and patient free of pain. Present Status
 : 10/11/67 progress of patient continues. Patient Number
 : 26. Age
 : 64
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of soft palate. Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : NoneResponse to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 1/26/67
Total Dosage and Response
 : 11 injections. Tumor static. Present Status
 : 11/15/67 patient free of pain. Patient Number
 : 27. Age
 : 90
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of soft palate. Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : M.T.X., I.A. Total dose 650 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Fair
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 10/21/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 11 injections. Tumor static. Present Status
 : 11/15/67 patient free of pain. Patient Number
 : 28. Age
 : 84
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of mouth
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : M.T.X., I.A. Total dose 650 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Fair
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 9/18/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 24 injections. Marked regression of size of tumor. Present Status
 : 11/11/67 regression continues. Patient Number
 : 29. Age
 : 28
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Chorioepithelioma. Terminal. Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 10/5/672 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : Immediate response after 12 injections. Gononadotrophin hormone level reduced from 350,000 I.U. to 35,000 I.U. Present Status
 : Died 11/5/67. Patient Number
 : 30. Age
 : 56
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Bronchogenic ca. with metastasis to left lung
Surgery
 : Removal of right lung. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : No X-radiation or other cancer drug. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 5/23/66
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 59 injections
Present Status
 : patient survived 16 months. Died 9/6/67. Patient Number
 : 31. Age
 : 58
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Ca. of stomach. Preterminal
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : None
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 11/7/66
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 40 injections
Present Status
 : Died 4/3/67. Massive hemorrhage. Patient Number
 : 32. Age
 : 70
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of soft palate
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : None
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 9/7/662 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 36 injections. Patient had remission. Present Status
 : No treatment for 4 months—deserted. Died 4/4/67. Patient Number
 : 33. Age
 : 40
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Adenoca. of penis with metastasis
Surgery
 : Amputation of penis. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : None
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 9/7/66
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV plus local application
Total Dosage and Response
 : 52 injections with daily local applications. Tumor
remained static. Dismissed 6/17/67. Present Status
 : 11/15/67 exact condition unknown but patient surviving. Patient Number
 : 34. Age
 : 42
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of penis
Surgery
 : Amputation of penis. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : None
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 4/10/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 54 injections. Daily local injections. Pain reduced. Present Status
 : 11/15/67 tumor is static. Patient Number
 : 35. Age
 : 89
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Squamous-cell ca. of larynx
Surgery
 : Laryngectomy. Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : None
Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 10/30/672 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 12 injections. Relieved of pain. Present Status
 : 10/10/67 patient in state of remission. Patient Number
 : 36. Age
 : 50
Sex
 : F
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Advanced adenoca. of cervix
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : M.T.X., I.A. total dose 650 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Fair
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 10/5/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 14 injections. Relieved of pain. Present Status
 : 10/10/67 tumor static. Patient Number
 : 37. Age
 : 66
Sex
 : M
Primary Tumor and Cell Type
 : Adenoca. of stomach
Surgery
 : None
Other Chemotherapy and Radiation
 : Total F.U. 1,200 mg. Response to Other Therapy Alone
 : Poor
Date of Administration Hematoxylon DMSO Dosage
 : 10/9/67
2 cc H-D.M.S.O., IV
Total Dosage and Response
 : 12 injections. Relieved of pain. Present Status
 : 11/10/67 patient in symptomatic remission. Ca. D.M.S.O. F.U. Carcinoma
Dimethyl sulfoxide       
Fluorouracil
     H.    Hematoxylon
MTX    Methotrexate
The physician will intravenously administer hematoxylon-DMSO in 5 percent
dextrose water. A vein in the arm is usually chosen for the injection, and the drip
speed averages approximately 47 drops per minute. If the patient has a low
tolerance to the intravenous injection, a Benadryl tablet swallowed 30 to 40
minutes before the IV starts can prevent the onset of fever. Please note that theinstructions are supplied for application by a duly licensed physician, as
potentially dangerous materials are being used here for the destruction of a
possibly deadly disease. These instructions are not to be followed frivolously by
anyone unskilled in the medical treatment of oncological conditions. For example,
the physician may wish to irrigate the injection site with 2 cc of heparin, a blood-
thinning agent, to avoid clotting, if the subclavian vein is chosen for infusion. The treatment solution may be taken orally. If so, the patient should have no
food or drink after midnight. Upon arising in the morning, pour about two ounces
of 5 percent dextrose water (saline, if a diabetic) into a small paper cup. Then,
using a syringe for precise measurement, put into the cup the same volume of
hematoxylon-DMSO solution that would be taken intravenously. Drink the
mixture. To allow for absorption of the therapeutic solution, wait at least 30
minutes before eating or drinking anything else. Important notation: In cases of
stomach cancer, do not drink this therapeutic mixture, because it will have a direct
effect on the tumor. The cancer disappears from the stomach lining, leaving behind
a hole similar to a gastric ulcer. Intravenous infusions are therefore more effective
for gastrointestinal cancer. For lung cancer, use the Bennett Respirator Machine and install 2 cc of saline
solution and 4 drops of DMSO-hematoxylon solution. Inhale the mixture for about
10 minutes twice a day. Use this inhalation therapy when not receiving an IV. Make sure that intervals of at least two hours occur between treatments. For bone cancer, take the intravenous infusion, but also swallow at least 2,000
mg of bone meal tablets each day. For facial cancer, reduce the solution by half with distilled water and apply it
to the skin, using a cotton-tip applicator. Paint the skin twice daily. Gradually
increase the strength of the applied solution as long as the patient does not show
any allergic reaction. The therapeutic solution can also be taken orally for facial
cancer. Other adjunctive drugs that sometimes accompany the application of
hematoxylon-DMSO-dextrose solution are cytoxin and F5U, but only for short
periods. Sometimes the various medications are alternated, using one one day and
the other the next. Both cytoxin and F5U lower the red blood cell count so that it is
imperative that a complete blood count be performed once or more a week. Also,
do not swallow aspirin when taking cytoxin or F5U. Instead, use a painkiller
substitute.
Dmso_Nature_s_Healer_-_Morton_Walker.txt
Summarize the following text section accurately and concisely. Maintain specific details and numerical information, and use anti-repetition mechanisms:

        2
They took a group of fifty-five children with trisomy 21 and divided them into
twenty-four patients as controls and thirty-one patients who received treatment. Examinations were conducted by a team of additional specialists, including several
pediatricians, a neurologist, a psychologist, a cardiologist, and an ophthalmologist,
before the test began and every six months during it, with the exception of the
pediatricians, who performed monthly examinations. All the patients—controls and experimentees—were separated into two age
groups. Group One was twenty-eight children less than three-and-a-half years old,
and Group Two was twenty-seven children whose ages varied from three-and-a-
half to fourteen. The DMSO aminoacid therapy was administered by intramuscular
injections with different time rhythms in each group. Children in Group One were given injections every other day in a series of 90
days alternating with a month’s rest. All received a minimum of three series. The
dosage was adjusted to their body weight. Children in Group Two received daily intramuscular injections of 5 cc each
over 20 days alternating with pauses of 20 days. During the entire period they
were given the same amino acids in the form of one or two capsules per day but
without DMSO as an ingredient of the 
capsule. The total treatment for this second
group consisted of five series of 20 injections each—in all 100 injections of 5 cc
each over thirty weeks. The psychometric determinations in children of Group One were performed
according to the Gesell test, calculating the development quotient, which is the
relationship of motor development, language, and social adaptation according to
the child’s chronological age. Neurological development was determined byobserving the sense organs, coordination, muscle tone, and sphincter control. For
the older Group Two, psychometric measurements were performed with special
tests such as the Binet-Kulman test. Every 40 days the IQ was computed
according to the Gesell, Wieneland, and Binet tests. Additionally, laboratory tests
were carried out, including those for red corpuscles, hemoglobin, hematocrit, white
corpuscles, sedimentation, urine, hepatic function, amino acids in the blood, amino
acids in the urine, and others. Finally, photographs were taken before, during, and
after treatment to capture the psychic state and preponderant physical features of
the child and any noticeable changes. The evaluation of results took into account the development quotient and the
IQ. If the increase represented more than ten points, this was considered significant
clinical improvement. Analyses were made of the motor area, the adaptive area,
the language area for the utilization and comprehension of verbal communication,
and the social area. Comparison of the psychometric and motor changes observed in children
treated in Group One, under three-and-a-half-years old, with those of the control
group reveals the following differences:
To start with, the controls and the treated children had a mean average 
motor
index
 of fifty-six; after one year the controls’ motor index rose to fifty-eight
but the DMSO aminoacid treated children’s motor index rose to seventy-two,
except for six cases where there was really no significant variation. In the 
area of adaptation
, the averages of the controls were fifty-two at the
beginning and forty-nine at the end of the observation. The adaptation
averages of the treated group were fifty before and sixty-six after the series of
DMSO aminoacid injections. Averages in the 
language area
 for control cases showed fifty-six before and
fifty-four after the observation period. The treated patients started with a
language area average of fifty-two and ended with an average of fifty-eight,
four of them improving by more than ten points. In controls, the initial average in their 
social area
 was forty-five, which rose to
fifty a year later. The treated group started with a social average of forty and
at the end of the treatment this rose to sixty-four. The mimetic capacity and
expression of those treated improved noticeably; their environmental contact
was also noteworthy, reported the researchers. In children of Group Two who were older than three-and-a-half years, thefollowing results were obtained:
Stagnation was observed in the 
motor area
 of the controls. Their averages
were thirty-four before the test began and thirty-six a year later, when it
ended. On the other hand, the initial motor area average of thirty-eight for the
DMSO-treated group rose to forty-nine by the conclusion of the clinical trials. In the 
language area
, the controls were also stagnant, but the use of speech
improved in the treated group by sixteen points. In six of the sixteen treated
children comprehension improved, too. No significant variation was seen in the control group for 
graphic age. In the
group treated with DMSO therapy, their initial graphic age average of twenty-
four points rose to thirty-nine, which was a significant improvement. At the beginning of the observation the control group showed an average
intelligence quotient of thirty-four and a year later this mean average had dipped to
thirty-three. The treated group indicated an average IQ of twenty-nine, which had
shot up to forty by the time the treatment program ended. Besides these favorable
changes, this older treated group showed other improvements in statics, motor
coordination, and muscle tone. Two treated children achieved sphincter control
during this test period of one year. No serious side effects in the laboratory examinations were reported. Nor were
any seen in the periodic clinical examinations. Manuel Aspillaga, M. D. , Associate Professor of Pediatrics and Director of the
Department of Genetics at the University of Chile, Calvo MacKenna Children’s
Hospital, led the research team consisting of pediatrician Mila Sanchez, M.
Manuel Aspillaga, M.D.
Who led the research on the DMSO therapy in Chile?
The study showed significant improvements in motor development, language, and social adaptation.
What were the results of the study on children with Down's syndrome?
The study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of hematoxylon-DMSO therapy in treating various types of cancer.
What was the purpose of the study on 104 patients with cancer?
E.J. Tucker, M.D.
Who was the doctor who treated Joe Floyd's cancer?
The children received 5 cc of Merinex, the DMSO-aminoacid product, intramuscularly three times a week, alternating with rest periods of 16 days, and orally administered amino acid capsules without DMSO.
What was the dosage for the children in Group Two?
The study showed a 70.5% improvement in condition, with 11 patients in remission.
What was the outcome of the study on 104 patients with cancer?