I am new to this forum.
My Mom has adenocarcinoma of the lung. Diagnosed in 2007 as stage 3/4 (inoperable). Since then she has been on Tarceva, a Clinical Trial and most recently Alimta and some brain radiation (stereotactic) due to some lesions that were missed in a brain scan earlier this year.
I have been reading about Graviola but there is very little clinical data out there about the benefits. Does anyone have any experience with it ? I have read that it may cause neurological side effects similar to Parkinsons but has shown to wipe out cancer in petri dishes. I'd really like my Mom to consider taking it if there has been some success. Any and all feedback is welcome and appreciated. As a family full of scientists we are always seeking data. This is a tough call since there is limited information available (at least that I am aware of).
Reply # - November 24, 2012, 08:10 AM
NSM, great to hear of your mother's five-year survival.
The annoying thing about graviola is that we did have a post about it from 2008, by Dr Bufi, a naturopathic physician, but for whatever reason I can't access it. However, the topic is also discussed here:
In that thread, one of the moderators quotes Dr Bufi as having written the following:
“I would not take or recommend a graviola product or any graviola extract as a dietary supplement. We do not have any convincing proof of efficacy, dosage, concentration, purity, nor basic safety data on the graviola plant.”
I expect you know of the MSK Botanicals webpage - they have some properly referenced sources which might be helpful:
We have a few other references to graviola from GRACE members which you can find by using the site's search function. One of the problems seems to be that it is called by various different names - Annona muricata, Brazilian paw paw etc.
Best wishes to you and your mother.
(And for anyone who knows more than me about the archive, this is the offending link that can't be accessed: http://cancergrace.org/alternative-medicine/2008/12/01/graviola/)
Reply # - November 24, 2012, 09:04 AM
I've asked Mark if he can help unearth that content. In the meantime, my perspective is just as you conveyed. I have no enthusiasm at all for recommending graviola as an anti-cancer therapy.
Reply # - November 24, 2012, 06:00 PM
Thank you for your reply, Dr. West.
I just read RTC1's reply (link below) about the use of graviola and subsequent success (though there is ambiguity as to whether shrinkage was due to graviola or treatment).
I'd like to reach out to RTC1 to see if there are any further updates from the last post but cannot seem to figure out how to engage in the above chain of correspondence.
Any advice/thoughts are welcome and appreciated. I have two bottles of Graviola for my Mom to consider using. As a Dr. she is hesitant but open to alternative meds. The more hands on experience I can read about ... the more open we may to considering this as a supplemental course to Alimta. At this stage ... we are simply open to informed possibility of anything that can turn back the hands of time.
Reply # - November 24, 2012, 07:14 PM
Hi NSM, I'm sorry but I don't think there is a way of contacting RTC1 but we can check that out with Mark too.
Reply # - November 25, 2012, 06:23 PM
The original Dr. Bufi post on Graviola has been restored here:
As well, a few other Naturopathic Medicine posts by Dr. Bufi and Dr. West have been restored, which should be available by search or by browsing the archives in the Cancer Basics section here:
Reply # - November 26, 2012, 01:02 AM
Thank you Mark!
Reply # - November 26, 2012, 05:15 AM
Thank you for reposting Dr. West and for your comments Janine.
I wonder why there has been no further research on Graviola if anything to rule out these grandiose claims we are finding on the net. It saddens me to think of the possible motivations behind the lack of hard data.
As always ... many thanks.
And please keep it coming ... if anyone out there has personal experience with graviola ... I would love to hear about it.
Reply # - November 26, 2012, 09:42 AM
Nadia, I must admit I've not done my own search for info on Graviola so I can't speak to that particular drug. Sometimes the lack of strong data is due to a lack of funding but sometimes the lack of funding is due to strong data.
One thing for sure is there is so much more promising research that needs to be done than there is money with which to do the research. I hate to admit it but it's the reason I'm so jealous of breast cancer research funding. Breast cancer researchers have more funding than they need to to followthrough with the leads they have and lung cancer can't do most of what they know needs to be done.
I spoke to Mark and he stated that at this time one way to contact another member is ask directly in a thread. I suggest using our Members Update section and use the username in the thread title. If they are still active you may get a response that way.
Another suggestion is to use the search feature to find a post by the member then click on the username. There might be more info written by the member on this subject that you will find by the search.
We want this site to be more and sometimes less than what normal forums have to offer so have had to branch out into new territory that doesn't support all the bells and whistles we'd like. So we (by we I mean Mark) have to work around what is available. WorkPress has the most to offer but also lacks some of the things like private messaging many members incorporated into their lives. Mark has made this one of his priorities but isn't there yet.
I will contact one of our doctors who may have a view to share that will be helpful.
All the best,
Reply # - November 26, 2012, 10:21 AM
Graviola has not hit my radar, either as a clinician or as an investigator. I've never used it or seen anyone treated on it. I am not aware of any data sufficient to make me see it as making the list of compounds/ideas that are most promising. I've written about vetting new ideas at http://cancergrace.org/cancer-101/2009/11/21/how-to-vet-a-treatment-ide… I will also ask Dr. Walko to comment if she knows any more about it.
Reply # - November 26, 2012, 10:35 AM
Reply # - November 26, 2012, 10:47 AM
Wow, that is a scant amount of info.
I read what Dr. Weil wrote and thought it interesting though like all else he doesn't make it remotely desirable.
Reply # - November 27, 2012, 06:27 PM
Thanks everyone ... just catching up on the above threads and the link for Dr. Weill. I appreciate how responsive everyone has been in sharing perspective. If you come across any new data or ANYTHING personal experiences with lung cancer and graviola I welcome them.
Reply # - May 17, 2013, 09:18 PM
Note that this fruit has been discovered to be the number one cancer cure. The Graviola plant is one of the most demanded plants in the world right now dew to it's medicinal abilities to cure cancer.
We as specialist have taken time to come out with the best powder to help you cure your cancer. We have very good quality dried leaves, seeds, fruit and juice which we produce from the graviola plant. Please contact for more details for we will offer you the best product to cure your cancer. It cures all cancer of the body so please kindly contact us if you are a patient. It will not cost you much for your cure.
Please contact us at: firstname.lastname@example.org if you will want to be cured of your cancer.
We sale graviola produce to help cure your cancer so if you are sick and will want to be well just contact us at the above e-mail address.
Reply # - February 23, 2017, 10:59 PM
NSM: I have found a few testimonials on graviola here. hope this helps! http://graviolacancers.com/category/graviola-testimonials/
Reply # - February 24, 2017, 07:59 AM
For anyone coming to this thread for the first time, and seeing the most recent post and are reading the testimonials cited in that post, I would urge that you read all the previous posts in this thread, following the links to other GRACE threads. In that way, you will understand the lack of enthusiasm by the GRACE faculty for graviola as an anti-cancer treatment.
Although I hope that those writing these testimonials are actual cancer patients who have been cured, the anecdotal "evidence" provided by such testimonials do not rise to the level of scientific proof required by medical oncologists. The identities of the individuals making such testimonials are rarely revealed, the facts they state and the results they obtain, whether from conventional therapies or alternatives, are not verified, and their experience has not been rigorously compared to others not using that alternative therapy.
As a comparison, sites such as Amazon and ebay limit the posting of reviews of products and services to those who have been verified to have actually bought those products or used those services. If comparatively minor decisions for those purchases have at least some level of verification, why would one make a major decision on cancer treatment based on completely unverified information?