The AMA (American Medical Assoc.) has lobbyists & WILL DO anything to maintain the Revenues of the Medical Ind., cancer information is being suppressed all the time.
What I think angers me the most is that ego is almost always put before the lives of others. This is in the medical/Drug arena as well as public cancer policy. I’ve talked to doctors who almost violently oppose any natural therapy even if they know nothing about it – policy makers as well.
This is not an issue of lack of education, it’s an issue of expanded egos and likely being massively overworked – so busy that the thought of even changing their belief systems creates massive anxiety. I think it’s wrong to always blame the doctors, because I’m sure you’ve been in a situation where you’re so busy that everything you respond to is a “no.”
Bottom line is that eventually the healing & curing results of natural treatments will speak louder than the revenue driven medical industry & one day we’ll all sit around and laugh at how backwards everything used to be.
2. Some interesting stats on cure rates and alternative cancer success.
I’ve known some of the stats that I’m going to share here, but seeing them represented in this way made it very clear to me that the power of some natural therapies is significant. Particularly when you consider that 95% of cancer patients who choose alternative routes are doing so in a “last ditch” effort.
Here are some stats …
- A true cure rate of 90% or more can easily be achieved by cancer patients who avoid orthodox medicine, go with alternative medicine first, and do their homework.
- The actual cure rate of orthodox medicine is 3% or less.
- 95% of cancer patients who go with alternative cancer treatments have previously had the full orthodox treatment and have been sent home to die, meaning alternative medicine is handed a large number of cancer patients already in critical condition. (see Dr. Esselstyn, Recalled By Life, Confessions of a Kamikaze Cowboy, Don Porter Beat Cancer, etc.)
- For those who wait to go with alternative cancer treatments until after they have been sent home to die, only a handful of the 300+ alternative cancer treatments are strong enough to give them a chance of survival.
- But even for those rare people who do find one of those potent treatments (e.g. those who read this book), at best they only have a chance of survival of about 50%.
I’ve heard many of these stats before, so I’m sure if you dig around you will be able to source them. Regardless, even if the numbers were lower, there’s still a lot to be said about the effectiveness of natural cures – particularly since they’re being used on people ravaged by conventional treatments. They’re the sickest of the sick and they still have somewhere around a 50% chance.
3. Is the “War on Cancer” working?
Richard Nixon declared a “War on Cancer” in 1971.
Since that day, over $2,000,000,000,000 ($2 Trillion) has been spent on conventional treatments.
Unfortunately, there has been little progress considering cancer rates have not decreased.
Here’s a quote about the so called “success” of this war…
According to Dr. John Bailer, who spent 20 years on the staff of the NCI and was editor of its journal, speaking at the Annual Meeting of the American Assoc. for the Advancement of Science in May 1985, “My overall assessment is that the national cancer program must be judged a qualified failure.”
I’d tend to agree. Anything that is not fixed after spending $2 trillion dollars on its “solution” should be junked.
4. Simply, a definition of cancer.
During the Healing Cancer World Summit, I asked each expert what they thought cancer was. There were many answers to this question, but many of them linked abnormal cell growth, immune system failure and toxicity.
Each one of these aspects came up regularly, so to me these items seem like clues that can’t be ignored.
In fact, Don Porter presents this simple definition of cancer that you may want to use when you explain it…
Cancer is “hypoxia (lack of oxygen) & acidic status at the tissue level and immune failure resulting from toxicity (chemicals in foods) and are the prime causes of cancer.”
I prefer simple ways to explain complex issues.
5. High pH kills cancer in most tumor cells in rats.
6. We’re all toxic.
While it’s great to think that since I eat a clean diet, I don’t have any toxic load – it’s just not true. In 2005, the Environmental Working Group put out a report by Jane Houlihan and Timothy Kropp, PhD, titled “Body Burden: The Pollution in Newborns.” Maybe you’ve heard of this study before, but I have to admit, every time I read it I think about what we don’t know about.
Here’s a clip from it…
“The placental cord blood of newborn babies was tested for 413 different industrial chemicals and found to be positive for 287 of these substances, which included PCB’s, mercury, DDT, dioxins, fluorinated hydrocarbons, organophosphates, and many other categories of POP’s.”
Basically, what this says is that you’re toxic even before you’re born these days.
8. Breast cancer cause found?
While I don’t know if this is the only thing that is causing breast cancer, it may be something that is worth looking in to. Some study has shown that women who wear bras can increase their risk of breast cancer substantially (I guess this could apply to men wearing bras as well…)
Here are the stats that came out of a small study done in 1997 by medical anthropologist Sidney Singer in Fiji. He compared the incidence of breast cancer between two groups of women. Ones who wore bras, the other group who didn’t.
Here’s what he came up with…
- Women wearing a bra 24 hours a day had a 3 in 4 chance of developing breast cancer.
- Women wearing their bras more than 12 hours a day, but not to bed, had a 1 in 7 chance of developing breast cancer.
- Women wearing bras less than 12 hours a day had a 1 in 152 chance of developing breast cancer.
- Women who rarely or never wore bras had a 1 in 168 chance of developing breast cancer.
If I had breasts that required a bra (or the “Bro” from those Seinfeld days), this would be compelling enough for me to release them from captivity – at least when I’m at home.
9. A very special herb.
There are herbs for cancer that are well known, but there are also ones that have been studies enough to even have conventional practitioners talking about them (though they’d likely only say there is a possibility they would work, LOL!)
Here’s one that I’m sure you’ve had before and might want to go out of your way to add to your recipes…
“Turmeric (curry) is known as “the golden spice of life” and has been used in Indian cuisine for thousands of years. As a matter of fact, it is impossible to think of Indian food without turmeric. Curcumin, the active ingredient in turmeric, has several cancer fighting properties. A recent study found that curcumin can actually repair DNA that has been damaged by radiation.
“This is very good news, because one cannot avoid all radiation sources. According to University of Chicago scientists, curcumin inhibits a cancer provoking bacteria associated with gastric and colon cancer. (Magad GB, Anticancer Research, Nov Dec 2002) Yet another anti cancer property of curcumin is that it is a powerful antioxidant.”
No comments:
Post a Comment