Asymmetrical Information

Uh, correlation proves causation. Don't you know anything?

In any event, to be taking human growth hormone during a period in life when you are more likely to be producing tumors seems unwise. Especially if the goal, as I fear, is essentially a vain one.

Actually, I believe that testicular cancer can move this fast. There are two forms of it, one of which (the faster version) double in size every week.

(Oddly, testicular cancer, which used to be the worst cancer, is now actually curable (thanks to developments in chemotherapy drugs), which is fairly unique among cancers — I don't believe that doctors will talk about "curing" any other form of cancer.)

That being said, I doubt that this woman had testicular cancer.

It wouldn't surprise me if getting cancer caused her to take HGH, rather than vice versa.

The article doesn't say why she decided to start taking HGH, but if she was an avid tennis player & runner, she might easily notice a loss of energy and stamina as the (undiagnosed) tumors on her liver & pancreas grew. So she goes to a friendly doc who tells her she just needs some HGH to boost her metabolism and energy.

Sometimes correlation does stem from causation, but not in the direction we think.

All speculative, of course, but I suspect the above causal chain is more likely than the one suggested in the article.

Actually, you don't even have "correlation" here. You just have one data point.

This is an instance of the fallacy of "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" (after it happened, therefore because it happened). This is different from the "correlation implies causation" fallacy.

Cancer can be very fast moving, but it is not that fast moving.

Ordinarily, yes, but query what rate of tumor growth and metastasis might be possible if you were taking megadoses of a growth hormone. (You may be right, of course, but I think there is reason to be less certain.)

Rapid and unexplained weightloss is a warning sign of cancer. It's likely that she had cancer before starting the HGH, but that the injections caused the cancer to spread faster.

Certain types of thyroid cancer are essentially curable. Others are aggressive and can spread very quickly.

Cancer takes years from initiation to final progression. To claim that something happens to cause a cancer free person to develop and die of cancer in a few months is idiotic.

One reason to give growth hormones to people with cancer is to make the cancer grow faster, which makes it vulnerable to chemotherapy.

As the above poster implied, HGH can dramatically increase cancer risks and speed cancer growth.
source

Taking those injections might not have given her cancer, but they certainly sped up its progression and shortened her lifespan. Autopsies reveal that most people who are 60 already have small tumors.

If the initial tumorogenesis was in the pancreas, the typical mortality rate on that's something like 95% of patients dead within six months of diagnosis, HGH or not.

http://www.emedicine.com/med/topic1712.htm

There are cases on record where cancer has moved this quickly, but a cursory examination certainly raises the question of whether the HGH injections played a role in this illness. It would take a great deal of study to reach any certain conclusion.

Human growth hormone does not increase metabolic rate. Therefore, I postulate that the 16 pounds of weight loss in two months was an effect of the undiagnosed cancer. The primary cancer probably was ovarian, which often is silent until it has spread throughout the abdomen and its organs. Ovarian cancer also commonly strikes women in their 50s.

It is unlikely that growth hormone was a factor in the woman's death, though its use as an anti-aging drug is risky due to lack of data on the long-term effects of hGH in older adults.

(reading label)

"Contains gelatin, FD&C yellow #5 ... oh crap, 'Cancer Growth Hormone'?!"

If the HGH in question is administered orally, it's questionable if any actually reaches the bloodstream. To the best of my knowledge, the only way to actually administer HGH to a human is via injections; all those pills that are flogged in spam are as useful as the wedding-tackle-size-enhancement "all natural herbal" products.

But if the question is, "how can there be such bad science in the New Duranty Times", to ask that question is to answer it...

"Dr. T" - My answer was deferred, perhaps because I cited several sources with URLs.

Human growth hormone does not increase metabolic rate.

Yes it does! Injected HGH increases fat metabolism. It makes humans and animals leaner in a number of experiments. I assume (and hope) that you're not really a doctor.

Ryan:

Yes, I am really a physician. There are published studies on young adults who received supraphysiologic doses of hGH. It altered their carbohydrate and lipid metabolism, but did not cause weight loss. Studies of older adults who received physiologic doses of hGH showed that some subjects replaced fat with muscle, but that was not associated with weight loss. The older adults who benefited were those with the lowest hGH levels prior to the study.

The main hormone affecting metabolic rate is thyroxine (thyroid hormone). Thyroid hormone would have to be administered in toxic doses to cause a 16 pound weight loss in two months. Human growth hormone, even at supraphysiologic doses, could not cause that much weight loss.

Actually, I believe that testicular cancer can move this fast. There are two forms of it, one of which (the faster version) double in size every week

The implied claim is that the cancer went from "nonexistant" to "inoperable" in about 16 weeks (two months of weight loss, then diagnosis 7 weeks later). Two to the 16th is less than 66,000 -- around one one-billionth of the body's cell count.

I would like to wish you much luck. And a lot of money. Thank you.

Very many thanks for a good work. Nice and useful. Like it!