Cancer patients are subjected to a barrage of cutting-edge medical treatments -- surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormonal therapy, etc.
How effective are these? Like in casino gambling --many patrons tried their luck and some win but many more lost.
At the end of the day, the winner is the Establishment! Don't get me wrong.
The "business" of curing cancer does produce winners.
Some current methods of treatment are very useful and life-saving.
But more often some treatments are just outright dangerous, if we care to see or know what had really happened.
A review of medical literature seems to indicate that CHEMOTHERAPY -- the use of cytotoxic drugs for killing cancer cells in the body, appears to many authors are "barbaric", while others feel that they are not effective at all.
The popular magazine in Germany, Der Spiegel of 4 October 2004, had an article entitled: "Giftkur ohne Nutzen" translated as "The Useless Poisonous Cures.
" The article stated that "increasingly sophisticated and expensive cellular poisons are being given to seriously ill patients ...
patients do not actually live a day longer.
" Wolfgang Wrasidlo, director of drug development, Scripps Clinic, La Jolla, California was quoted to have said: "Everybody knows that our present cancer drugs are lousy.
" Barry Sears, author of Enter the Zone wrote: "The existing treatments for cancer are probably the most barbaric in modern medicine.
" Dr.
Jeffrey Tobias, clinical director of the Meyerstein Institute of Oncology, UK, (in the book: Cancer) said: "It is ...
surprising how often the rule of: first do no harm is ignored".
Sometimes oncologists use chemotherapy indiscriminately with "no justification other than the physician's desire to do something.
" Such remark is indeed disturbing.
Does it mean that in the past or even now, chemotherapy has been used on patients indiscriminately? Dr.
Urich Abel, an eminent German professor at the University of Heidelberg concluded that: (in Der Spiegel 33:174-176.
1990):"For most of today's common solid cancer, the ones that cause 90% of the cancer deaths every year -- breast, lung, colon, rectum, skin, liver, pancreatic and bladder --chemotherapy has never been proved to do any good at all.
" Dr.
Ralph Moss, fired from the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center for telling the truth, has written books and numerous articles on chemotherapy - e.
g.
, Questioning Chemotherapy, Cancer Industry, etc.
According to Dr.
Moss "chemotherapy usually doesn't cure cancer or extend life.
It does not improve the quality of patient's life either.
On the contrary it can "greatly decrease the quality of life.
" Albert Braverman, a professor of oncology at the State University of New York, USA, wrote: "Many medical oncologists recommend chemotherapy for virtually any tumour, with a hopefulness undiscouraged by almost invariable failures" (Lancet, April 1991.
337:901).
Johan Bjorksten from the University of Wisconsin, USA, wrote: "Chemotherapy alone destroys the immune system beyond a point ...
which increases the risk for early death from infections and other cancers in these immunologically naked people.
" (in J.
Bjorksten,JAB Pulb.
, 1978, pg.
22, Charleston, S.
C).
Dr.
Richard Evans (in his book: The Cancer Breakthrough You've Never Heard Of) wrote: "Patients should understand that chemotherapy is of little benefit for ...
solid tumors.
Every year thousands of people endure toxic side effects ...
and receive little, if any, benefit.
" Dr.
W.
John Diamond & Associates, writing about conventional medical treatment for cancer said: "The so-called success of conventional cancer treatment is often illusionary.
There is no conclusive ...
evidence or data demonstrating long-term successful outcomes or reasonable rates of remissions to support these practices.
" Dr.
John Lee & Associates wrote (in their book: What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Breast Cancer): "Some chemotherapy does prolong life for a few months, but generally at the high price of devastating side effects.
The use of chemotherapy is purely a gamble...
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't and sometimes it makes things worse.
" In the light of the above comments by various experts I feel that cancer patients need to empower themselves.
In the name of fairness, I feel that anyone who is to undergo any invasive treatment procedures such as chemotherapy MUST be provided with sufficient and honest information so that he would be able to decide for himself what is best for him.
Unfortunately, many patients who came to see us were left ignorant or very much unaware of what they were in for --the cards were not laid out for them.
Sometimes they were even misinformed.
Without any disrespect to any person or profession, I have to point out that one much needed step that has to be taken is to seek the truth about the current treatments for cancer.
Let us study all the records available and let us ask these questions and find honest, unbiased answers.
For all the surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy (and other drugs) that have been administered to patients: 1.
How many patients have been cured? 2.
How many have benefited from the treatments? 3.
What are the benefits and at what cost? 4.
How many died? 5.
How many survived after one, two, three, five or ten years after the treatments? 6.
How many siffered metastases of the liver, bone, lungs, etc.
? 7.
Is there any correlation between the treatments they received and the metastases that occurred? Unfortunately, such answers remain elusive and not forthcoming.
The strategy to remain in this lucrative cancer-treatment-business is to be as non-committal with the real facts -- be as vague and ambiguous as possible in addition to putting up a false front of "I-know-all" image.
"You patients don't ask too many questions.
I am the one who know best and you just follow my orders.
" Let me end with this quotation: "None are so blind as those who have eyes and see not; and none are so deaf as those who have ears and hear not.
"
How effective are these? Like in casino gambling --many patrons tried their luck and some win but many more lost.
At the end of the day, the winner is the Establishment! Don't get me wrong.
The "business" of curing cancer does produce winners.
Some current methods of treatment are very useful and life-saving.
But more often some treatments are just outright dangerous, if we care to see or know what had really happened.
A review of medical literature seems to indicate that CHEMOTHERAPY -- the use of cytotoxic drugs for killing cancer cells in the body, appears to many authors are "barbaric", while others feel that they are not effective at all.
The popular magazine in Germany, Der Spiegel of 4 October 2004, had an article entitled: "Giftkur ohne Nutzen" translated as "The Useless Poisonous Cures.
" The article stated that "increasingly sophisticated and expensive cellular poisons are being given to seriously ill patients ...
patients do not actually live a day longer.
" Wolfgang Wrasidlo, director of drug development, Scripps Clinic, La Jolla, California was quoted to have said: "Everybody knows that our present cancer drugs are lousy.
" Barry Sears, author of Enter the Zone wrote: "The existing treatments for cancer are probably the most barbaric in modern medicine.
" Dr.
Jeffrey Tobias, clinical director of the Meyerstein Institute of Oncology, UK, (in the book: Cancer) said: "It is ...
surprising how often the rule of: first do no harm is ignored".
Sometimes oncologists use chemotherapy indiscriminately with "no justification other than the physician's desire to do something.
" Such remark is indeed disturbing.
Does it mean that in the past or even now, chemotherapy has been used on patients indiscriminately? Dr.
Urich Abel, an eminent German professor at the University of Heidelberg concluded that: (in Der Spiegel 33:174-176.
1990):"For most of today's common solid cancer, the ones that cause 90% of the cancer deaths every year -- breast, lung, colon, rectum, skin, liver, pancreatic and bladder --chemotherapy has never been proved to do any good at all.
" Dr.
Ralph Moss, fired from the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center for telling the truth, has written books and numerous articles on chemotherapy - e.
g.
, Questioning Chemotherapy, Cancer Industry, etc.
According to Dr.
Moss "chemotherapy usually doesn't cure cancer or extend life.
It does not improve the quality of patient's life either.
On the contrary it can "greatly decrease the quality of life.
" Albert Braverman, a professor of oncology at the State University of New York, USA, wrote: "Many medical oncologists recommend chemotherapy for virtually any tumour, with a hopefulness undiscouraged by almost invariable failures" (Lancet, April 1991.
337:901).
Johan Bjorksten from the University of Wisconsin, USA, wrote: "Chemotherapy alone destroys the immune system beyond a point ...
which increases the risk for early death from infections and other cancers in these immunologically naked people.
" (in J.
Bjorksten,JAB Pulb.
, 1978, pg.
22, Charleston, S.
C).
Dr.
Richard Evans (in his book: The Cancer Breakthrough You've Never Heard Of) wrote: "Patients should understand that chemotherapy is of little benefit for ...
solid tumors.
Every year thousands of people endure toxic side effects ...
and receive little, if any, benefit.
" Dr.
W.
John Diamond & Associates, writing about conventional medical treatment for cancer said: "The so-called success of conventional cancer treatment is often illusionary.
There is no conclusive ...
evidence or data demonstrating long-term successful outcomes or reasonable rates of remissions to support these practices.
" Dr.
John Lee & Associates wrote (in their book: What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Breast Cancer): "Some chemotherapy does prolong life for a few months, but generally at the high price of devastating side effects.
The use of chemotherapy is purely a gamble...
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't and sometimes it makes things worse.
" In the light of the above comments by various experts I feel that cancer patients need to empower themselves.
In the name of fairness, I feel that anyone who is to undergo any invasive treatment procedures such as chemotherapy MUST be provided with sufficient and honest information so that he would be able to decide for himself what is best for him.
Unfortunately, many patients who came to see us were left ignorant or very much unaware of what they were in for --the cards were not laid out for them.
Sometimes they were even misinformed.
Without any disrespect to any person or profession, I have to point out that one much needed step that has to be taken is to seek the truth about the current treatments for cancer.
Let us study all the records available and let us ask these questions and find honest, unbiased answers.
For all the surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy (and other drugs) that have been administered to patients: 1.
How many patients have been cured? 2.
How many have benefited from the treatments? 3.
What are the benefits and at what cost? 4.
How many died? 5.
How many survived after one, two, three, five or ten years after the treatments? 6.
How many siffered metastases of the liver, bone, lungs, etc.
? 7.
Is there any correlation between the treatments they received and the metastases that occurred? Unfortunately, such answers remain elusive and not forthcoming.
The strategy to remain in this lucrative cancer-treatment-business is to be as non-committal with the real facts -- be as vague and ambiguous as possible in addition to putting up a false front of "I-know-all" image.
"You patients don't ask too many questions.
I am the one who know best and you just follow my orders.
" Let me end with this quotation: "None are so blind as those who have eyes and see not; and none are so deaf as those who have ears and hear not.
"
Source...