Home Buy now! Contact Us Site Map Payments
MIKHAIL TOMBAK
MARIA TREBEN
HOW TO ORDER
FREE EBOOKS
OTHER RESOURCES
Search
  Go

Blog / Dec 11, 2017
Feb 04/09
Disease in a Bottle
Jan 30/09
The Art of Staying Young
Nov 18/08
Our Attitudes and Aging
Nov 03/08
INABILITY TO LIVE A BLISSFUL LIFE
May 27/08
Large intestine cleansing
Oct 29/07
Look after your health as carefully and tenderly as you look after your car.
Oct 22/07
We are what we eat
Oct 18/07
Less flour - more power
Oct 09/07
The truth about meat – the time bomb
Oct 04/07
CHEAP CANCER CURE?
Oct 01/07
Disease in a Bottle
Sep 25/07
The Danger of Refined Foods
May 16/07
INCORRECT BREATHING
Mar 26/07
Factors Causing Damage to our Health
All news


Effective non-toxic treatments for cancer...

By Rev. Barbara Clearbridge

SUPPRESSION OF FACTS BY RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS AND GOVERNMENTS

“Despite the public’s support and growing interest in nontoxic, noninvasive alternative approaches, the medical establishment has waged a fierce campaign against such therapies, labeling them quackery.... Official medicine pours billions of dollars into narrow research supporting chemotherapy, radiation and surgery as the major weapons in ‘the war on cancer.’ That war has been a total failure in slowing the death rate... “‘Everyone should know that the “war on cancer” is largely a fraud,’ wrote Dr. Linus Pauling, two-time Nobel Prize Winner. Another Nobel winner, Dr. James Watson, codiscoverer of the DNA double helix, put the matter more bluntly. Watson served for two years on the National Cancer Advisory Board. Asked in 1975 what he thought of the National Cancer Program, he promptly replied, ‘It’s a bunch of shit."4

Dr. Hardin Jones, Professor of medical physics at the University of California at Berkeley, analyzed cancer survival statistics for 25 years. In 1969, at an American Cancer Society (ACS) meeting, he said that untreated patients do not die sooner than patients receiving orthodox treatment, and in many cases they live longer. This negative assessment was subsequently supported by three other studies done by other researchers. No study has ever refuted these findings.5

A group of vested, interlocking interests preserve the status quo in cancer treatment and research. This group includes the ACS, National Cancer Institute (NCI), large pharmaceutical companies, and some insurance firms, hospitals, and medical schools, according to Richard Walters, author of Options: The Alternative Cancer Therapy Book. He asserts that this “medical cartel” is headed by the American Medical Association (AMA), “a trade union with an extremely powerful lobby.” According to Walters, the AMA represents less than half the allopathic (conventional) doctors in the U.S., yet has a stranglehold over government American health care policies.

Over the course of time, the AMA has denounced midwifery, selfcare, optometry, homeopathy*, osteopathy, acupuncture and lay analysis as being dangerous, fraudulent, or both.

* A long-established medical profession in Europe

In 1987, the AMA was found guilty of restraint of trade in a “conspiracy to destroy and eliminate” the chiropractic profession, a legitimate competitor. Chiropractic physicians still have reporting requirements which allopathic physicians do not. The AMA continues to stage campaigns against alternative methods and doctors.

In 1953, U.S. Justice Department lawyer Benedict Fitzgerald led an investigation into the cancer industry. The investigation concluded that the AMA, NCI and FDA had entered into a conspiracy to promote radiation, chemotherapy and surgery, while suppressing promising therapies that were highly praised by the cured patients themselves. What was the government’s response? Fitzgerald was fired.7

FACTS ABOUT SURGERY

Here are some things to think about when pondering having surgery. The September 22, 1986 issue of “Business Week” noted that surgery, radiation and chemotherapy all tend to fail for a very simple reason: a tumor the size of your thumb has one billion malignant cells in it. Even if a treatment gets 99.9% of them, a million remain to kill you.8

"An operation on a bad malignant case is a very [great] matter. Sometimes one gets a blaze up of toxaemia.... Further, cancer has very frequently spread far beyond the reach of operation and the operation shock hastens the spread of the [cancer] virus and the death of the patient.”9

How about lymph node surgery, in an effort to remove every cancer cell? Patrick McGrady of CANHELP says: “Even though it’s been proven conclusively that lymph node excision after radiation does not prevent the spread of cervical cancer, you will still see lymphadenectomies performed all over the country routinely. This despite the fact that lymphadenectomies make women feel so bad they wish they were dead – and are a proven useless procedure.”10

FACTS ABOUT RADIATION TREATMENT

“The majority of cancers cannot be cured by radiation because the dose of X rays required to kill all the cancer cells would also kill the patient. 11

Professor John Cairns, Harvard University School of Public Health, 1985

Dr. Robert R. Jones, 1980: “Many radiation complications do not occur for several years after treatment, giving the therapist and the patient a false sense of security for a year or two following therapy...the bone marrow, in which blood cells are made, is largely obliterated in the field of irradiation.... This is an irreversible effect.”12

Dr. Lucien Israel, consultant to the NCI, said in 1978, that people who undergo radiation therapy are more likely to have their cancer metastasize to other sites. Other studies have supported this view. He also stated that the radioactivity intended to kill cancer cells can, instead, trigger mutations that create new cancer cells of other types.13

According to several clinical trials and a study published in “The Lancet,” a British medical journal, radiotherapy [radiation] following breast surgery increases death rates.14

Early studies at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center In New York showed that radiotherapy was deadly and that patients who received NO radiation lived longer than those who were irradiated.15

Dr. Irwin Bross, former Director of Biostatistics at Roswell Park Memorial Institute, said in 1979: “For 30 years radiologists in this country have been engaged in massive malpractice.” It should not surprise us that Bross was unable to get funding to research what he calls “doctor-caused cancer” from radiation therapy.

If these studies and quotes are true, why does your doctor continue to recommend radiation? We’ll get to that in the last part of this report. In the meantime, he or she certainly knows about the side effects, which include severe, prolonged immune deficiency (which leads to contracting other kinds of illnesses), and chromosomal damage, both of which can result in later cancers. These are not “side effects,” these are PRIMARY EFFECTS. Radiation can also cause nausea, vomiting, weakness and fatigue (to the point where some patients become bedridden), sores or ulcers, bone death following irradiation of the mouth, welts and extensive burns of the skin, rectal ulcers, fistulas, bladder ulcers, colitis, and even the swelling of a tumor after a large dose of radiation, which is especially dangerous for brain tumors. If these “side effects” were caused by an herbal treatment, a homeopathic one, or any alternative treatment, do you think the treatment would be approved by the FDA and the AMA?

Dr. William Kelley, developer of an alternative, metabolic treatment: “Often while making a biopsy the malignant tumor is cut across, which tends to spread or accelerate the [cancer] growth. Needle biopsies can accomplish the same tragic results.” Surgery to remove the tumor can do the same thing. Dr. Kelley advises using homeopathic treatment to 16 render the tumor harmless before attempting surgery.

FACTS ABOUT CHEMOTHERAPY

“The cancers from which most people die – the big killers like breast, colon, and lung cancer – generally do not respond to chemotherapy. Chemotherapy has only a limited effectiveness against any tumor that is large or has spread; its successes are generally with small, very early tumors. Several studies indicate that chemotherapy has no survival value in breast cancer.”17

Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon or lung cancers. The fact has been documented for over a decade.... Women with breast cancer are likely to die faster with chemotherapy than without it.”18

Dr. Alan Levin, Professor of Immunology, University of California Medical School, 1987

Dr. John Cairns says that chemotherapy at most prevents “perhaps 2% or 3%” of the cancer deaths each year. If 19 you have been diagnosed with cancer, find out if your type will be hurt or helped by chemotherapy. (See Resources)

Ulrich Abel, Ph.D., of West Germany, did a comprehensive study on chemotherapy. In 1990 he wrote, “There is no evidence for the vast majority of cancers that treatment with these drugs exerts any positive influence on survival or quality of life in patients with advanced disease.” He stated that although chemotherapy does shrink tumors initially in many patients, unfortunately this did not prolong survival because the cancer usually returned, often more aggressively than at first. In Abel’s poll of hundreds of cancer doctors worldwide, he discovered that many oncologists would not take chemotherapy themselves if they had cancer. Publicity about Abel’s research was completely suppressed in the U.S. (So much for freedom of speech in the media.)

Dr. Levin, at a national conference on medical abuses, said: “Practicing physicians are intimidated into using regimes which they know do not work. One of the most glaring examples is chemotherapy, which does not work for the majority of cancers. Despite the fact that most physicians agree that chemotherapy is largely ineffective, they are coerced into using it by special interest groups which have vested interest in the profits of the drug industry.” (More 20 on that, later.)

In the meantime, chemotherapy continues, despite the fact that ALL chemotherapy drugs are toxic, and many are themselves carcinogenic.

Where is the logic in using cancer-causing drugs to fight cancer? Where is the logic in suppressing the body’s mechanism for fighting disease – the immune system – in order to fight disease? According to statistics about treatment results, there IS no logic. It doesn’t work.

“The ‘proven’ methods of toxic chemotherapy, carcinogenic radiotherapy [radiation] and surgery are a failure for the majority of patients. The death rates from the six major killer cancers – cancers of the lung, colon, breast, prostate, pancreas, and ovary – have either stayed the same or increased during the past sixty years.21

The overall, age-adjusted cancer death rate has RISEN by 5% since the “war on cancer” began, and this is despite earlier detection.22

Before you agree to chemotherapy, surgery or radiation, contact some of the consumer groups listed at the end of this report. Get some second opinions about the effectiveness of these choices for your specific kind of cancer.

“As each technological advance entered medical practice, we found ourselves paying an increasing price of unexpected side effects. Most technological cures for cancer, for example, were found to be carcinogenic themselves. Because such unexpected side effects have required additional ‘technological fixes,’ we now find ourselves in a spiral in which technological applications are piled one atop another, with no end in sight, and no cure for the patient. The chemical-mechanistic paradigm* has failed, and a medical revolution has begun.... Many physicians are reexamining and applying therapeutic techniques that were previously discarded as ‘unscientific’ by academic medicine. The use of foods, herbs, meditation, and acupuncture are only a few examples. This radical change in medical practice is deeply rooted in ancient concepts of life, energy, and medicine, and it includes a reaffirmation of the innate healing ability of living things.”23

* This idea states that people are machines: if a part breaks, you fix that part. The paradigm does not take into account the rest of the body, or the effects of lifestyle, mind, emotions and spirit on health.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACS: American Cancer Society      NCI: National Cancer Institute
FDA: U.S. Food & Drug Administration       AMA: American Medical Association


Go To Next Page

Back to Table Of Contents


Unsubscribe
December, 11 
Copyright © Healthy Life Press Inc. 2000 -2015. All rights reserved.