The AMAS blood test is a test developed by Dr. Samuel Bogoch for detecting cancer antibodies in the blood. AMAS stands for Anti Malignin Antibody Serum. This peptide is present in cancer patients and determines the antibody to malign tumors.
Tumor markers are chemicals made by cancers and measurable in the blood, for example CA125 in ovarian cancer and PSA in prostate cancer.
From Dr. Timothy Smith, chapter 13 of the GcMaf book:
“Our immune system recognizes an antigenic protein on the surface of cancer cells. In 1988 Dr. Bogoch discovered this antigen and named it “malignin.” When our immune system identifies the presence of malignin, it starts making anti-malignin antibodies. Dr. Bogoch then developed the AMAS test, which signals the presence of cancer by identifying the presence of anti-malignin antibodies.”
The AMAS antibody is produced by the immune system in response of the antigen “malignin”.
This antibody is present in all people, also healthy persons. Because our immune system is fighting little cancers in our bodies all the time we speak of an elevated AMAS level above a established baseline of 135. This test measures levels of and anti-body instead of measuring antigen.
With this molecular approach to cancer the tumor can be detected before forming a lump of billions of cancerous cells together.
Test reading
In one of the studies found on the website that provides the AMAS test they explain:
“Negative value: ranging from 0-134 µg/ml, while positive determinations where equal or greater than 135 µg/ml. The range of AMAS from 100-134 µg/ml is designated as borderline but designated as normal if confirmed on a second test to be 134 µg/ml or below.”
This would mean that if you have a read of 134 or above that a (early) cancer is detected. This does however not tell you what kind of cancer or where it is located.
At least you know there is something wrong and you can choose to have a biopsy, scan or other test done or just start on an “alternative” protocol right away and test again after a certain time on the protocol. An increased number would indicate a growth or spreading of the tumor and on the contrary a decreased number would indicate remission.
This study suggests that the AMAS test is 99% accurate when the test is done within the 24 hours of the blood been drawn (backed with a 3315 double-blind tests of patients and controls).
This study also says:
“The AMAS test is shown to be sensitive to small primary tumors and carcinoma. All 11 patients with 10 mm or less diameter tumors were positive for the AMAS test (see Table 3).”
The AMAS test can detect tumors as small as a pencil dot which is a major difference with the common tests available. PET scans for example can’t detect tumors smaller than 1 cm.
Another quote from this study states: “This study collectively demonstrates that anti-Malignin is elevated almost regardless of site or cell type of the malignancy.” Therefore making it not just efficient to detect one kind of cancer but any type of cancer, at the same time leaving you uninformed about type and location. This is one of the reasons many doctors do not want to use this test as it makes them uncomfortable and unsure how to help their patients.
To see this study click here
Accuracy of the AMAS test
The next study shows how they repeatedly tested the accuracy of the AMAS test by using “normal healthy control group”, “early detection group” and a “monitoring group”.
In the “normal healthy control group” there was one woman with an elevated test. They found she had cancer of the uterus (confirmed by gynecological cytology). In Table 2 you can see how she was tested repeatedly before, during and after surgery of cancer of the cervix. It shows how the AMAS levels spike up one day before surgery (>377) and then drops 3 months after surgery (from >230 to <65) and stays under the baseline the months after.
The following was found in the “early detection group”:
“Both in the cancer and non-cancer groups of the “early detection group” the AMAS results were in agreement with the histo-pathological findings in all 32 cases. The number of patients found to have cancer out of the number selected on each clinical indication was as follows:
- Where symptoms and signs suggested cancer in the differential diagnosis, 48 patients were tested, and of these, 18 cases of cancer (37.5%) were detected.
- Where patients requested the test, 10 patients were tested, and of these, 2 cases of cancer (20%) were detected.
- Amongst 70 healthy controls tested, 1 case of cancer (1,4%) was detected.”
In the monitoring group the following was found:
“The diagnosis was confirmed by histopathology in all monitoring cases.”
“The overall accuracy of the predictive correlation of the AMA level with the clinical status in the monitoring group was 64 of 68 determinations correct (94.1%)”
To read the whole study paper and the conclusions made click here
According to these studies the AMAS test is quite accurate overall.
Conventional health care and AMAS
Like Dr. Timothy Smith says in his chapter about AMAS; “Not knowing a cancer’s name and location tends to drive doctors nuts; “How can you treat a cancer when you don’t know what it is or where it is?”
I would like to comment on a page I found on the net. This is a website where people can ask questions to a doctor via a chat. This “customer” (that indeed is how the pharmaceutical industry likes to see you) asked about the AMAS test because all her siblings were diagnosed with cancer as other family members and she would like a doctors opinion on its effectiveness.
The “doctor” immediately states that the AMAS test has not been proven effective enough according to 2 pages he points out. One of the pages directs you to cancerresearch UK and the other is a study done by Kronos Longevity Research Institute who: “were founded by billionaire John Sperling to discover anti-aging products and are trying to research ways to slow down aging.”
The “doctor” continues the conversation by admitting there are no very good test methods available and proceeds by summarizing the conventional test methods and their ineffectiveness to then come to the conclusion that:
Dr. David: “the long and short is that there are no reliable blood tests to predict cancer early.”
His advice is: half yearly mammograms, colonoscopy at age 50, PSA test (for man), HPV testing on pap smears (for women) and annual chest CT scan for smokers. With as a final advice:
Dr. David: “mammogram and ultrasound together have a 90% + sensitivity to picking up breast cancer as well and it is much more studied than AMAS test.”
To me this only proves once again that conventional doctors are so mislead and often short minded. It always saddens me that many of them do not undertake any action to find out the truth of the matter for themselves and completely rely on information and studies provided to them by their “employers” or “source of income” (meaning: pharmaceutical companies).
To read the conversation between “doctor” and “customer” click here
Contras of AMAS
Besides from the allunknowing doctors out there, there are some specialists that really look into the subject and still aren’t in favor of it for several reasons. In the following article a pathologist has some question marks at several statements found in the publications from Oncolab (the AMAS test manufacturer). He looks at the test and its science from different angles and concludes: “advice against basing clinical decisions on the “anti-malignin antibody serum test.””
To view his reasons read article here
The fact that the test is approved by the FDA raises my eyebrows. But considering that the test is rejected in the world of mainstream cancer treatment and research makes it interesting.
Please investigate for yourself and try to find as many testimonials and experiences as possible and always combine it with other tests to not rely only on AMAS testing.
Difference between AMAS and Nagalase
The difference between an AMAS test and the Nagalase test is that AMAS tests specifically on an antibody produced by the immune system in a response of an antigen produced by cancers. This means only cancers can elevate the AMAS levels, whereas Nagalase is an enzyme secreted by both cancers and viruses. So when high Nagalase is measured in the blood it can be due to a tumor producing Nagalase or a virus.
Conclusion
- The AMAS test can be used to detect early stages of cancerous
activity (before X-rays, MRI’s and CT or PET scans can).
- The AMAS test can be used before/instead a biopsy, mammography
or other uncomfortable tests. - The AMAS test can be used as a follow up and control test after
surgery, chemo, radiation, GcMaf or other treatments. - The AMAS test is safe and does not have any harmful side effects
like other test methods do. - AMAS and Nagalase tests together make an efficient check-up procedure.
This way of testing shows to have a lower false-positive and false-negative read than most conventional testing methods. If able to get the test done (especially when covered by your insurance), and alongside other test methods, I don’t see a reason why not using the AMAS test, even if only as a double check-up (read: do not only rely on this test).
Until today the only place you can get an AMAS test is through Oncolab (www.oncolabinc.com).
You can go to their website and see the FAQ with info on price, insurance and more.
I am not sure whether the test is available for citizens outside the USA.
Hopefully in the near future this test will be available all over the world for a reasonable price or/and included in the health insurance for everyone.
If you decide you want to do an AMAS test click here for some useful info before ordering. This person has listed some helpful tips and more information on how to proceed.
Sources:
Chapter 13 of “The GcMAF Book” from Dr. Timothy Smith on AMAS:
Other studies:
- http://www.oncolabinc.com/paper.php?id=J.Adv.Med_1997.pdf
- http://www.oncolabinc.com/paper.php?id=CancerDet_Prev.1994.pdf
- http://www.oncolabinc.com/paper.php?id=CancerDet_Prev.Antibody.2000.pdf
- http://www.oncolabinc.com/publications.php#ref8 (all publications of oncolab)
Other publications and views on the AMAS test:
Immune-Activator 