The Cancer Cover-Up

Credit to my brother, the author of this piece:

           

            “Cancer” is an ominous word that generates fear in many individuals. The body tenses up like a brick immediately upon hearing it. Primarily, it’s the fear that the end of life is near. Whatever life that remains for them may never be the same with this knowledge. One could make the argument that ignorance is bliss. My Junior II clinical rotation has been at Stanford Hospital, which is world-renowned for their excellence in treatment of complex diseases. Many times throughout this semester, I’ve been stationed in an Oncology unit. My experience working in this unit has only contributed to my exasperation towards our allopathic treatments available for cancer patients. Words do not sufficiently describe how abject some patients are of their prognosis. I’ve overheard patients anxiously pleading with their bedside physician if there was any hope left for them, only to have their physician respond with the demoralizing “truth”. I’ve overheard other healthcare professionals discuss of how a certain patient is in denial of her worsening prognosis, and who can blame her? The husband also has cancer, and they have a young child. Upon overhearing that, my heart goes out to them as I empathize for what they must go through as I realize that at the end of the day, she has to be the one to go through this agonizing process. It really is a despondent feeling and it gives me goose bumps when I realize that these patients have had to contemplate about their own mortality, especially at such an inopportune age. I can just leave the hospital at the end of the day, and I’m no longer attached to their predicament. I can head out the door with the world ahead of me and a bright future in sight. However, for our patients, their nightmare is reality…

            It’s nearly a standard procedure that every patient runs through. Something prolonging and irritating has been bothering the patient, and he goes to the doctor to have it checked out. Upon X-Ray, a foreign and abnormal density has been picked up. The patient cringes as he stares at the X-ray with an abnormal growth developing in the body, and the doctor refers the patient to an oncologist for biopsies. Upon the biopsy, a fine needle is inserted and removes a piece of the tissue that will be examined. Panic ensues, as the patient incessantly ruminates if the tissue is benign or malignant. If benign, a huge sigh of relief overcomes the patient. However, the dreaded word, “malignant”, is starting to become ever more prevalent. Subsequently, there are two notable choices of action in the public’s eye, which are chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery or plainly and simply, do nothing. Should the patient live out the remaining time left without allopathic treatment whatsoever and die on his own terms? Or should the patient take chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery to “extend” the life meagerly to go along with the detestable side effects? Well, over 50% of cancer patients choose the chemotherapy route (Jordan, n.d.). But deny the chemotherapy route, and healthcare professionals will perpetually chide the patient that their longevity of life will be rapidly coming to an end and there is no other viable alternative. However, erudite individuals who have done their research will adamantly declare that for the vast majority of cancer cases, chemotherapy simply does not work.

            To the cancer patient, chemotherapy only has a 3% “cure” rate (Garcia, 2004). And to be frank, the true gravity of the situation is even direr. To elaborate, the “cure” is categorized by a cancer patient who has lived at least 5 years post diagnosis before dying (Garcia, 2004). Hence, the patient can die a day after 5 years post diagnosis and be classified as “cured”! This means that at the very least, chemotherapy has a 97% failure rate! Think about that. This is absolutely appalling! This expensive, futile treatment has been used by healthcare professionals to treat cancer since the 1960’s, and studies prove that chemotherapy treatment is an absolute fraud. In fact, the polarizing antithesis of allopathic treatment is actually more effective in extending survival time, and that is no treatment whatsoever!  A recent study concludes that as many as 22% of invasive breast cancers in Norwegian women disappeared spontaneously, while there is a putrid 1.4% improvement seen in studies with chemotherapy treatments for breast cancer women in the US (Durgin, 2009).  There are studies out there that genuinely prove how futile chemotherapy is, but why do physicians, oncologists, and healthcare professionals keep pushing chemotherapy as the allopathic treatment for cancer? Numerous decades of experience is more than sufficient to gauge the ineffectiveness of chemotherapy. The underlying reason chemotherapy is used is because treating illnesses is a much more lucrative business than curing illnesses. (Pharmaceutical companies made over $90 billion in 2008 (Szabo, 2010)). And if cures for cancer are present out there in this world, who’s to say that the manufacturing pharmaceutical companies who have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to produce the drug, test the drug, and have it approved by the FDA won’t use everything in their legal and political power to influence what the public knows and what healthcare uses. Money is the name of the game, and medicine is business. So whether healthcare professionals push this due to their ignorance of the ineffectiveness or due to a nonchalant acceptance of the status quo, it’s our family and friends, if not ourselves, that come to pay the ultimate price. What more is there to lose other than the loss of life? Apparently, the loss of money and business is more important to pharmaceutical manufacturers as long as they are not the ones personally affected by the disease. Can you believe how sordid and despicable that is? Money trumps morals.   

            Any erudite healthcare professional knows that every living person, whether healthy or not, has hundreds of potential cancer cells produced in their body daily. However, in healthy individuals, there is a potent immune system that removes these foreign, abnormal cells. Thus, those cells don’t have the opportunity to divide and grow. Cancer is one of the symptoms experienced due to the formation of runaway tissue and further enhanced by a failing immune system. Thus, a robust immune system is a primary prevention and treatment for foreign cells. And yet, chemotherapy drugs and radiation suppress and depress the immune system! Isn’t that absurd? Why are we giving a drug that suppresses a natural treatment? A study in the Journal of the American Medical Association concluded that upon studying 223 prostate cancer patients, no treatment whatsoever was superior to any standard chemotherapy, radiation, or surgical procedure (Johansson, 1992). In another study cited in the February 13, 1993 British medical journal, Lancet, 33% of autopsies showed prostate cancer, but only 1% died from prostate cancer. Half of males over the age of 75 had prostate cancer, but only 2% died from it. Additionally, there are 30-40 times as many autopsy cases of thyroid, pancreatic, and prostate cancer discovered than ever presented to physicians. Hence, astounding numbers of people have had these cancers within their body, unbeknownst by themselves, and have continued to live without knowledge of that. Now, why is that?

            The body has an innate mechanism called encapsulation that occurs with foreign bodies, and tumors are no exceptions, as it’s been well documented that tumors can be encapsulated for an entire lifetime, never becoming active (O’Shea, 2010). However, what’s one of the first tests modern healthcare performs when there is an abnormal density? Let’s obtain a biopsy of that and see if it’s benign or malignant. Well, currently we have something that has been walled off and sealed off. So, now let’s break the protective encapsulation by putting a needle all the way into the abnormal tissue and draw out these potentially cancerous cells, while exposing them to the rest of the body. They are essentially inviting metastasis. This exact procedure demonstrates the typical flawed thinking of a human being as a car. If something is wrong with the engine, all we have to do is fix or replace the engine, and all will work properly. The human body is not analogous to a mechanical object. What you do in one place will affect another part of the system. And yet, this conventional treatment is done with a flagrant disregard for the body’s natural mechanisms. Why? Every consultation, drug, treatment, and procedure that “healthcare” professionals perform equals money in the bank for them. It’s absurd how expensive healthcare treatments are in the United States, and it’s no wonder these healthcare businesses want to start the billing cycles as soon as possible.

            As audacious as this may sound, these mainstream cancer organizations, such as The American Cancer Society and the Susan G. Komen foundation, are charlatans. What makes me state such an audacious claim? It’s a waste of money, because we’re fundraising healthcare treatments that are futile, ineffective, and cytotoxic. The American Cancer Society collects hundreds of millions of dollars per year, and only a pitiful amount is used for research. The majority of the money goes to investments and paying the extravagant salaries of the administrators. Ironically enough, the ACS states that if a cure for cancer is ever found, they will disband. So is it reasonable that such a lucrative organization will ever want to disband? I don’t need to answer that. I believe that the public is vastly ignorant, and I don’t mean this in an arrogant way. Chemotherapy simply does not work, and people need to be cognizant of that. But since their physicians and healthcare professionals tell them their appropriate plan of action, why wouldn’t they believe that someone who’s ultimate purpose is to help them, is actually acting disingenuously, whether by ignorance, nonchalant acceptance of the status quo, or worst of all, on purpose because of money. You may understand why pharmaceutical companies do that, but why do doctors promote these? Well, physicians are paid to push certain medications. Especially since America is a pill-popping culture, patients expect medications, and physicians are paid duly to promote certain brands. Additionally, the primary method hospitals make money is by performing surgeries. If cancer patients weren’t going in for their routine poison, burn, and cut it out phases, there would be much less incidences of surgeries needed, and hospital profits would plummet.

            Intriguingly, cancer was essentially unheard of in 1900. However by 1950, there were approximately 150 cases of cancer per 100,000 people (Cancer Statistics, 2010). By 1975, there were approximately 400 cases per 100,000. By 1992, the number had shot up to about 511 cases per 100,000. Some slight good news is that in 2010, the rates had dropped slightly to about 458 per 100,000. There has been a slight decline in recent years, albeit it is still, by far, drastically higher than in 1950. The death rate of Americans in 1900 due to cancer was approximately 64 per 100,000 (Rodio, n.d.). By 1975, there was approximately 199 deaths per 100,000, and by 1991, there was about 215 deaths per 100,000 (Surveillance Epidemiology, 2010). Again, there have been some slight declines in recent years down to 172 per 100,000 in 2010, but this goes to show that from a macroscopic level of inspection, the number of deaths from cancer has not significantly improved, albeit numbers of recent years have abated. These data show that on a macroscopic level, cancer incidences have drastically increased when compared to only a century ago, and have more than tripled in half a century! (Go to page 12 and take a look at the charts). In the 1980s, we were spending over $50 billion per year on “finding” the cure (Szabo, 2010). Today, we are spending $300 billion, and look at how meager cancer deaths have changed. In comparing the highest apex of cancer deaths in 1991 of 215 deaths per 100,000 to the lowest point of cancer deaths in 2010 of 172 deaths per 100,000, there is at the very most a 20% decrease, and that is measuring from the absolute zenith of the spectrum to the absolute lowest point of the spectrum over the past 35 years. Considering the monumental amount of money that we’ve put into research, this project has flagrantly failed.

            So what is going on? Well, in the 1900, people primarily ate what they grew, which were whole foods that came in their original form, free of being processed and refined with chemicals and preservatives added in. Post World War I, processed foods suddenly expanded first in the canning industry which developed into the food processing industry. (World War I officially ended on November 11, 1918 with the Treaty of Versailles). The idea behind these businesses’ “geniuses” was to attempt to increase product longevity as much as possible so more products could be sold to increase overall profits. To do this, chemical additives, preservatives, bleaching and other refined processes were utilized in this massive food production scheme. Hence, shelf life increased, food value decreased. Now, unlike what these goofballs have been spending hundreds of billions of dollars in “researching” the cause of cancer, known carcinogens are very well documented. These additives, preservatives, and food coloring that have been added into our food and water are chemicals! Just take any processed food off the shelves at Safeway, and take a look at the ingredients. If the ingredients sound unnatural, it’s because they are. The internet has lists of myriad numbers of preservatives out there, such as sorbic acid and potassium benzoate, and additives to look out for. Fluoridated water is another major problem. After our dog got diagnosed with osteosarcoma, we got a water purifier and an inorganic compound tester came with it. If you place the tester into our drinking water, it registers at level that is above the recommended level, which in purest level, should register as 000. The faucet water that we use to wash our vegetables and fruits registered in the hundreds! It is absolutely filthy, and to think that we had given our dog that water for 10 years. (It was unfortunate that we had to learn all this through our dog’s illness, but I’m glad I know now). Air pollution is another toxin in our environment. Chlorine in our swimming pools, oxybenzone in our sunscreen and facial products, pesticides and herbicides on our fruits and vegetables, genetically modified foods, and more are all in question. I feel that anything that is not natural and which we are constantly putting upon our bodies will cause a response. For certain known chemicals, the response is abnormal tissue growth. Mix that in with a suppressed immune system, and these two combine for the perfect storm. It’s no wonder cancer incidences have skyrocketed. Look at how prevalent fast food businesses and processed goods are outside and in the market. These businesses add chemicals to foods so they can last the longest and freshest to increase profits, and the ramifications are egregious. Businesses, absolutely, unequivocally do not have our health in mind. 

            Since chemotherapy is widely ineffective, are there other alternative holistic modalities to treating and curing cancer? It’s a vast world. Someone out there has got to know something. Well over the past 75 years, there have been many natural and effective cures for cancer that have been discovered, and quickly abdicated from the market. Examples of some include DCA, the Rife machine, the Black Box, and Avemar (O’Shea, 2010). DCA was sold as an innocuous supplement on the market, but after patients started to realize that it was curing them of cancer, the FDA outlawed the supplement two years post-initial marketing (O’Shea, 2010). Numerous innovations have come about, only to be suppressed and lost as arcane knowledge that would be greatly beneficial for human beings. However enigmatic some of these cures might sound, the underlying commonalities behind all of these are that they strengthen the immune system, are found in a natural form, are non-toxic, have no side effects, are easily obtained without prescription, inexpensive, and non-patentable (O’Shea, 2010). Again, pharmaceutical companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars to get a drug onto the market, so what happens if there is a cure that has no side effects, is inexpensive, and easily obtainable? Suppression through legal and political juggernauts is the answer.      

            So how do we prevent or cure ourselves of cancer? The first step is our diet. We must eat natural, 100% organic, healthy, nutritional, unprocessed foods. Avoid foods with preservatives, additives, colorings, pesticides, and herbicides. It must be free of chemicals. Water needs to be purified and free of fluoride. Additionally, since cancer cells thrive in an acidic environment but not in an alkaline environment, drinking alkalinized water will greatly help, as blood plasma consists of 92% water! Air also needs to be free of pollution. We need to stop poisoning ourselves. Step two is to remove as much stress in our lives as possible, as stress hormones, primarily cortisol, suppresses our immune system. We need to resolve emotional distress and conflict with others and ourselves. We need to relax and breathe and be free of toxins, be it from food, water, air, or in our social environment. Step three is to detoxify our bodies of toxins that we do have. Our bodies’ own detoxification system includes the liver, kidney, and intestines. These are the major evacuation channels in the body that removes toxins. The use of supplements such as Digestazyme, florabiotics, and Oral Chelation are recommended to help clear the body of heavy metals and toxins (O’Shea, 2010). Step four is to exercise, as it ameliorates our immune system and gets blood and oxygen to all of our bodies’ cells, as cancer cells cannot grow in an oxygen-sufficient environment. Last and not least, other supplements are recommended for use, such as the immune-enhancing supplement, Transfer Point Beta Glucan. Vascustatin is recommended to prevent angiogenesis. Megahydrate is used to prevent further DNA alterations. All and all, the list of alternative modalities are endless and can be found online.  

Clandestine knowledge is out there. Don’t be misled by your “altruistic” healthcare professionals. Don’t be misled by skewed data and statistics. Response rate and flawed risk-benefit analysis are only two methods that can cause statistics to be skewed to bolster a flawed argument (O’Shea, 2010). If a patient’s condition suddenly improves for a week and the tumor temporarily shrinks, the patient can be categorized as having “responded” to chemotherapy. Unbeknownst to many people is the phenomenon called the Rebound Effect. Give a body-builder steroids and his testosterone levels will increase and his body will initially respond by building more muscle. However, natural testosterone production weans due to excess and the athletes gonads shrink in response. Antibiotics given will kill vulnerable bacteria, but then comes the rebound of stronger, resistant bacteria. The same occurs with chemotherapy. It is quite common for tumors to shrink initially with chemo, but then comes a bout of rapid proliferation of tumor tissue. Hence, flawed conclusions can be drawn from skewed data to bolster a particular side, so be prudent of that. Nonetheless, skewed data is a topic for another day. Individuals need to learn to think for themselves. Don’t rely on these “experts” to decide your future. The status quo is not working. Change is needed, and the time is now. The truth is glaringly obvious when the whole story is realized. Cancer is the pandemic symptom experienced as a result of the suppression of arcane knowledge. This road that we heading down now is reclusive. It will be lonely. There will be ridicule and potholes in the road, but we need to be the mavericks. We need to be the pioneers to pave the way for the rest of society. I stated earlier that ignorance is bliss, but that is only true in certain cases. Ignorance can kill. How many of our families and friends have been led down this insidious path? Enough is enough. Information needs to spread. Allopathic treatments have not worked for decades, and that is not going to change. Healthcare is business; business is money. Remember that.

Above: Not representative per 100,000 people, but still reflective of trend. 

Below: Cancer mortalities per 100,000 have steadily increased. Cancer chemotherapy began in the 1940s.

                                                       Bibliography

Durgin, Jennifer (2009). Study reveals surprising cancer remission rate. [ONLINE] Available      at: http://dartmed.dartmouth.edu/spring09/html/disc_remission.php. [Last Accessed May 8, 2013].

Garcia, Carlos (2004). THREE PERCENT (3%) EFFICACY OF CHEMOTHERAPY TREATMENT ON CANCER CURE . [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.bestzapper.com/pdf/3.percent.chemo.cure.rate.pdf. [Last Accessed May 8, 2013].

Johansson, J, MD “High 10 Year Survival Rate in Patients With Early Untreated Prostate Cancer”JAMA Apr 22 1992 vol 257, p. 2191

Jordan, Frank (). Chemotherapy and Radiation as Cancer Treatments. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.nsc24.com/chemo_radiation.htm. [Last Accessed May 8, 2013].

O'Shea, Tim (2010). To the Cancer Patient. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/cancer/to-the-cancer-patient/. [Last Accessed May 8, 2013].

Rodio, Mary (). Are We Overlooking the Obvious in Cancer Prevention?. [ONLINE] Available at: http://curezone.com/art/read.asp?ID=163&db=1&C0=74. [Last Accessed May 8, 2013].

Szabo, L – Patients bear brunt as cancer care hits $90 billion USA Today 18 Mar 2010

 (2010). Cancer Statistics. [ONLINE] Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2010/browse_csr.php?section=2&page=sect_02_table.05.html. [Last Accessed May 8, 2013].

(2010). Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results. [ONLINE] Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2010/browse_csr.php?section=2&page=sect_02_table.06.html. [Last Accessed May 8, 2013].