 |
...the cause of cancer is no longer a mystery, we know it occurs whenever any
cell is denied 60% of its oxygen requirements.
Cancer, above all other diseases, has countless secondary causes. But, even for cancer, there is only one prime cause. Summarized in a few words, the prime
cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar. All normal body cells meet their energy needs by respiration of oxygen, whereas cancer cells meet their energy
needs in great part by fermentation. All normal body cells are thus obligate aerobes, whereas all cancer cells are partial anaerobes.
Dr. Otto Warburg in The Prime Cause and Prevention of Cancer
Welcome to page six of Healing Cancer Naturally’s “Why Choose Alternative Cancer Treatment?” series. This page assembles a powerful sequence of
incisive, outspoken (and often shocking) statements by cancer specialists, researchers and thinkers on the subject of cancer causes, drugs and cancer statistics.
Full
introduction and complete list of Healing Cancer Naturally articles: Why Choose Alternative Cancer Treatment
Understanding the Nature of Ill Health and Disease
The entire approach and foundation of Orthodox Medicine is based on Louis Pasteur's Germ Theory, a
flawed concept. A disease condition is viewed by the orthodoxy as an isolated event, confined to the area in which it manifests itself (e.g. an ear infection, eye infection, gum infection, lung cancer, skin cancer, etc. ).
Under this theory, for unknown reasons, microbes or tumors indiscriminately grow in the patient and must be cut (surgery), burned (radiation), or poisoned (drugs) out of the body. In the orthodox model, the solution is sought
through mechanical and chemical solutions. Seeking to understand WHY the infection or disease condition appeared in the first place, is not usually seriously explored. The quick fix with a prescription of drugs to smother the
symptoms is the typical 'answer'.
A contemporary of Pasteur, Antoine Beauchamp, had a different opinion as to why disease conditions 'took hold'. Beauchamp felt that the ENVIRONMENT, or the ECOLOGY of the blood played the
critical role in deciding whether disease conditions would manifest or not.
Alternative medicine explores the stressors (environmental, biological, chemical, psychological, and emotional) in a patient's life that cause a
weakening of a particular energy field;
which in turn allows the manifestation of a disease condition in a weakened area. In order to maintain a state of health, all energy systems within the body need to exist in a state of balance or equilibrium. Imbalance leads to
conditions of discomfort (dis-ease) which eventually spirals into ill health if not corrected. The Chinese and Indians (Ayurvedic medicine) had worked all of this out thousands of years ago.
Orthodox or Allopathic Medicine
utilizes poisonous substances (drugs) in non-lethal dosages in order to suppress symptoms in an affected area. This approach neither addresses the cause of the disease condition, nor is it responsible for healing the patient.
Rather, the use of drugs often will temporarily mask the outer manifestations of the malady, while at the same time, drive the disease deeper into the body...only to reappear at a later date, as a more serious, and chronic
health threat. One of the many flaws of the orthodox approach is that it focuses on the disease condition itself, rather than the patient. The term wholistic (or holistic) sprang up to distinguish those physicians whose
diagnostic gestalt considers all of the physical, emotional, and spiritual energies interacting with the patient.
Ken Adachi in Forbidden Cures - Suppressed 'Alternative' Therapies
...the basic cause of disease is no longer a mystery. The basic cause is the habits of improper diet, inadequate exercise, negative mental attitudes, and lack of spiritual attunement which combine to produce toxic conditions and malfunction of our bodies. The elimination of the cause of illness is the obvious and only way to healing and health. The elimination of the habits that cause illness is done through the positive approach of developing proper habits that cause health combined with corrective techniques that remove the ill effects of our former incorrect ways.
Stanley Burroughs
Cancer is a disease of civilisation. It is practically unknown to the primitive races leading primitive lives. Hundreds of medical men who have practised
for decades among the South African negroes have never seen a cancer case... On the other hand, cancer is not uncommon among the South African negroes in the coast towns who for decades have lived more or less on the white
man's diet... Cancer is essentially a nutritional disease. It is far more prevalent in the towns where people subsist on artificial food than in the country where men eat fresh natural food, take plenty of exercise and are less
troubled with intestinal stagnation and auto-intoxication than are the sedentary inhabitants of the larger cities. We need not abolish civilisation in order to abolish cancer. We need only reform our lives in accordance with the dictates of nature...
Sir Arbuthnot Lane, Bart., C.B., M.B.,M.S., F.R.C.S., speaking in the House of Commons
Seventeen out of every 20 cancer victims shouldn't have cancer, they have been murdered by the callous indifference of the people with power.
Dr Vernon Coleman, F.R.S.M., Sunday Independent, November 1987. (Dr Coleman went on to become President of the International League of Doctors Against
Vivisection.)
But nobody today can say that one does not know what cancer and its prime cause be. On the contrary, there is no disease whose prime cause is better known, so that today ignorance is no longer an excuse that one cannot do more about prevention. That prevention of cancer will come there is no doubt, for man wishes to survive. But how long prevention will be avoided depends on how long the prophets of agnosticism will succeed in inhibiting the application of scientific knowledge in the cancer field. In the meantime, millions of men must die of cancer unnecessarily."
Nobel Prize Winner Otto Warburg in a meeting of Nobel Laureates, June 30, 1966
The food we eat is not mankind's only determining factor. The body, soul and spirit all have their functions and roles to play, their areas of influence. But the harm done by eating the wrong kind of food fats has repercussions in all realms of life, including healthy mental and spiritual functioning. In our world, however, the choice of healthy food is one of the elementary aspects of our lives which we should organize as such. It is far more important than many people in the Western world are willing to admit. It is not those who acknowledge this fact who are materialistic in their way of thinking, but those who are not willing to forego something, in order to achieve a far greater goal.
Dr. Johanna Budwig, who developed an often-successful protocol
for healing cancer naturally, in "Flax Oil as a True Aid"
More quotes on cancer causation & genesis
The person who takes medicine must recover twice, once from the disease and once from the medicine.
William Osler, M.D.
It goes without saying that Chemo Therapy, all sorts of medication and drugs as well as radiation should be regarded as a “last straw” recourse - to
be avoided at all cost during effective natural cancer or AIDS therapy. Why destroy a body’s immune system when it already needs all available reserves to fight a disease condition? While nobody should abruptly stop the use
of any prescribed medication, many man-made synthetic drugs interfere with the functions of essential fatty acids and healing herbs. Deficiencies of the fatty acids themselves and essential minerals, can often create the
conditions of fatty degeneration collectively known as cancer.
Dr. Jürgen Buche
The medical and scientific establishments have (largely through the fact that they have sold out to the enormously wealthy and powerful international
pharmaceutical industry) obtained more or less complete control over politicians and the media.....advertisements for my book Food for Thouqht are still banned by Britain's Advertising Standards Authority because the book
contains advice on what sort of diet to eat in order to reduce the chance of developing cancer. Drug medications consists in employing, as remedies for disease, those things which produce disease in well persons. Its materia
medica is simply a lot of drugs or chemicals or dye-stuffs, in a word poisons. All are incompatible with vital matter; all produce disease when brought in contact in any manner with the living; all are poisons.
R.T. Trall, M.D., in a two and one half hour lecture to members of congress and the medical profession, delivered at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington D.C. in
1862
The FDA 'protects' the big drug companies and are subsequently rewarded, and using the government's police powers they attack those who threaten the big
drug companies. ... The thing that bugs me is that the people think the FDA is protecting them. It isn't. What the FDA is doing and what the public thinks it is doing are as different as night and day.
Dr. Herbert Ley, former U.S. FDA commissioner
In 1974 eleven FDA scientists testified in the Senate "...That they were harassed by agency officials...whenever they recommended against approval of
marketing some new drug."
Gavin Phillips in The Cancer Racket
Drugs never cure disease. They merely hush the voice of nature's protest, and pull down the danger signals she erects along the pathway of transgression.
Any poison taken into the system has to be reckoned with later on even though it palliates present symptoms. Pain may disappear, but the patient is left in a worse condition, though unconscious of it at the time.
Daniel. H. Kress, M.D.
We've got the equivalent of a 747 crashing and burning every calendar day for a year from iatrogenic side effects from properly prescribed pharmaceutical
drugs. This is documented in the Journal of the American Medical Association, which has identified properly prescribed prescription drugs as the third-leading cause of death. When Dr. Barbara Starfield wrote the article in
JAMA, July 26, 2000, she stated that the ioatrogenic causes of death in U.S. hospitals averaged 225,000 per year. This means mistakes by nurses, doctors and hospital systems. Of that figure, 106,000 deaths per year were from
non-error use of prescribed medications. This was a decade-long study. The label "third largest cause of death" was for the entire system. The non-error use of prescription drugs was roughly half that amount. It still
means that over 1 million people were poisoned to death in the decade of the nineties by the pharma cartel. At the same time, there was not one death from Niacin, Chromium Picolinate, L-Arginine, L-Carnitine, Vitamin C or any
other nutrient sold and taken by human beings.
John Hammell, International Advocates for Health Freedom www.iahf.com
The cause of most disease is in the poisonous drugs physicians superstitiously give in order to effect a cure.
Charles E. Page, M.D.
If one goes into remission from breast cancer I understand that Tamoxifen will provide a 41% chance that it will not recur. We are not told that it will provide a 540% greater chance of abdominal cancer developing. We have lost one good friend that way already. ... Read the fine print on the back of the bottle.
Anonymous
Compare Budwig FAQ and broccoli sprouts: natural alternative to Tamoxifen.
The greatest part of all chronic disease is created by the suppression of acute disease by drug poisoning.
Henry Lindlahr, M.D.
Every educated physician knows that most diseases are not appreciably helped by medicine.
Richard C. Cabot, M.D. (Mass Gen. Hospital)
The ideal use of medication from the [Edgar Cayce] readings’ perspective was for short-term assistance in giving the body stimulation or strengthening,
while working with nutrition, eliminations, and systems coordination in rebalancing the body. While the readings occasionally endorsed some of the medications available at the time, much more commonly did they suggest herbal
combinations.
Eric Mein, M.D., in The Legacy of the Cayce Health Readings
The British paper, The Independent, of 8th December 2003 carries three articles about why drugs might not work effectively in "most" patients.
"It is an open secret within the drugs industry that most of its products are ineffective in most patients but this is the first time such a senior drug company boss has gone public.", Dr Allen Roses, an academic
geneticist from Duke University in North Carolina and Head of Genetics at Glaxo-SmithKline, Britain's biggest drug company, said at a scientific meeting in London: "The vast majority of drugs - more than 90 per cent - only
work in 30 or 50 per cent of the people." He cites figures on how well different classes of drugs work in real patients. "Drugs for Alzheimer's disease work in fewer than one in three patients, whereas those for cancer are only effective for a quarter of patients. Drugs for migraines, for osteoporosis, and arthritis work in about half the patients”...According to John Bell, the Regius Professor of Medicine at Oxford University: "One of the biggest obstacles is culture. We've all been taught to take the dose for a drug straight out of the British National Formulae and then if that doesn't work to add another drug to the prescription, and so on. So we can end up with lots of patients on four or more drugs where only one would do. This is a big cultural issue to overcome."
From The Independent, 8th December 2003
Orthodox or Allopathic Medicine utilizes poisonous substances (drugs) in non-lethal dosages in order to suppress symptoms in an affected area. This
approach neither addresses the cause of the disease condition, nor is it responsible for healing the patient. Rather, the use of drugs often will temporarily mask the outer manifestations of the malady, while at the same time,
drive the disease deeper into the body...only to reappear at a later date, as a more serious, and chronic health threat. One of the many flaws of the orthodox approach is that it focuses on the disease condition itself, rather
than the patient. The term wholistic (or holistic) sprang up to distinguish those physicians whose diagnostic gestalt considers all of the physical, emotional, and spiritual energies interacting with the patient... The thrust
of the orthodox pharmaceutical agenda is to provide temporary relief, while never addressing the cause of the disease condition. This agenda insures regular visits to the doctor's office and requires the patient to routinely
return to the pharmacy to refill his prescriptions...The profits from the so called "health-care" industry are staggering!
Ken Adachi in Forbidden Cures - Suppressed 'Alternative' Therapies
Medical practice has neither philosophy nor common sense to recommend it. In sickness the body is already loaded with impurities. By taking drug-medicines
more impurities are added, thereby the case is further embarrassed and harder to cure.
Elmer Lee, M.D., Past Vice President, Academy of Medicine
The necessity of teaching mankind not to take drugs and medicines, is a duty incumbent upon all who know their uncertainty and injurious effects; and the
time is not far distant when the drug system will be abandoned.
Charles Armbruster, M. D.
We are prone to thinking of drug abuse in terms of the male population and illicit drugs such as heroin, cocaine, and marijuana. It may surprise you to
learn that a greater problem exists with millions of women dependent on legal prescription drugs.
Robert Mendelsohn, M.D.
Cured yesterday of my disease, I died last night of my physician.
Matthew Prior (17th c)
Les médecins gavent leurs patients de médecines dont ils ne savent pas grand-chose pour guérir des maladies dont ils savent encore moins, chez des
êtres humains dont ils ne savent rien. (”Doctors stuff their patients with drugs of which they know little, to cure diseases of which they know less in human beings of whom they know nothing.”)
Voltaire (whose aphorism I’ve seen misquoted, hence the addition of the original)
I used to have a certain awesome reverence for medical doctors, but not any more. It is not that they are bad folks, necessarily, in spite of their
too-busy-to-talk-to-you attitudes, their harried schedules, their general pompous views of their own status and education, and their "scientific" approach to their profession. It is that they are bountifully ignorant
about the very subject they should know most about: nutrition. The typical MD gets one or two courses in nutrition in his education, and virtually nothing in his training. He knows little or nothing about homeopathy. He is
concerned mostly with treating SYMPTOMS rather than causes, because he really knows little about causes of illness. So when you go to an MD for advice, don't look at him as a God. According to consumer advocate Ralph Nader,
medical doctors actually caused the deaths of 300,000 people per year in the USA in the last half of the 20th century through negligence and error. That is more Americans killed in one year by doctors than were killed in World
Wars I & II, the Korean War, and the VietNam "war" COMBINED! Doctors know a lot about drugs and medicine, and the therapies they practice, but don't expect ANYTHING sensible from them at all on any other subject
related to your health.
Bob Hurt
...the perception of cancer as a specific localized condition, which a specific drug (or herb) will counteract. It is far more appropriate to approach
this condition as a manifestation of systemic disease, and use such systemic treatments as are appropriate in aiding the body to regain control. Herbs can be most effective in supporting this sort of bodily transformation
through their cleansing, strengthening and healing properties. They work best when they are part of an approach to transformation - change in body, mind and spirit - which is possibly the only effective context in which to
treat cancer.
Dr. Jürgen Buche, Preventorium Institute
The War Against Quackery is a carefully orchestrated, heavily endowed campaign sponsored by extremists holding positions of power in the orthodox
hierarchy.....The mutimillion-dollar campaign against quackery was never meant to root out incompetent doctors; it was, and is, designed specifically to destroy alternative medicine...The millions were raised and spent because
orthodox medicine sees alternative, drugless medicine as a real threat to its economic power. And right they are...the majority of the drug houses will not survive.
Dr Atkins, M.D. (The Healing of Cancer by Barry Lynes)
...The results of seven years of research reviewing thousands of studies conducted by the Nutrition Institute of America show for the first time that
medical errors are the number one cause of death and injury in the United States ... Over 2.2 million people are injured every year by prescription drugs alone and over 20 million unnecessary prescriptions for antibiotics are
prescribed annually for viral infections.
...Based on the results of NIA's report, it is evident that there is a pressing need for an overhaul of the entire American medical system.
The findings, described as a
"revelation" by Martin Feldman, MD, ... are the product of the first comprehensive studies on iatrogenic incidents (those caused by the treatment or drug itself). Never before has any study uncovered such a massive
amount of information about the degree and effect of iatrogenesis. Historically, only small individual partial studies have been performed in this area.
Carolyn Dean, MD, a physician and author..., "I was completely
shocked, amazed, and dismayed when I first added up all the statistics on medical death and saw how much allopathic medicine has betrayed us."
For full article see www.icmedicine.co.uk/journal/nov03/005.htm.
More quotes and facts on drugs
Recommended Reading:
Questioning Chemotherapy: A Critique of the Use of Toxic Drugs in the Treatment of
Cancer by Ralph W. Moss
Compare The TRUE Cost Of Your Prescription Drugs! and
As Doctors Write Prescriptions, Drug Company Writes a Check.
Also see Nature Heals and Healing Cancer.
On Cancer Statistics
Introduction by Healing Cancer Naturally
You may have heard that statistics can be used (presented in a way) to "prove" anything. In fact, eminent alternative and conventional cancer
treatment researcher Lothar Hirneise devotes much space to the fallacies and lying associated with conventional oncology's "success" statistics (a “success” may for instance involve just a few months lived beyond expectation with severe impairment of quality of life, or ”tumor response” while the truly important thing is normally to prevent metastasis). So you may often see conventional doctors argue in terms of "5 years survival", for instance (no matter if at death's door by then). This may have little to do with long-term survival and even less so with quality of life - it may in fact amount to little more than statistical jugglery since patients apparently "cured" by conventional approaches can suddenly fall seriously ill and even die of other diseases which can be directly traced to the toxic treatment(s) they received (see Possible Serious Side Effects of Orthodox Cancer Treatment Doctors Might Not Have Told You About). Such cases will nevertheless be chalked up in official cancer statistics as treatment successes - after all, they managed to cure the patient of cancer first (even if s/he
died later of stroke or other sequelae of the toxic treatment they received)...
WHO'S WINNING?
We're constantly being hit with media stories about "progress" in the war on cancer and new "breakthrough" drugs and procedures being "right around the corner." The military rhetoric hasn't
changed since 1971. Is it true that we're winning the war against cancer like they're always telling us?
From the U.S. government's own statistical abstracts we find the real story:
Mortality from Cancer in the U.S.
year --- deaths/ 100,000
1967--- 157.2
1970--- 162.9
1982--- 187.3
1987--- 198.2
1988--- 198.4
1989--- 201.0
1990--- 203.2
1991--- 204.1
1992--- 204.1
source: Vital Statistics of the United States vol.II 1967-1992
1992 is the last year for which data is
currently available from Vital Statistics. There is nothing to indicate that there should be any downturn between 1992 and the present. In fact, independent analysis by the CA Journal for Cancer Clinicians, Jan 97, put the 1993
death rate at 220 per 100,000. Does that sound like progress?
Why does nobody know this? Bet you never saw this chart before.
Numbers can be twisted and made to do tricks. This chart is the raw data, not age adjusted or
divided by race, or type of cancer. Anyone can dig this information up by going to any library reference section. But try finding a medical reference or journal article or a URL that uses this chart. Try finding a newspaper or
magazine article in the last 15 years that uses the raw data. And this data says one thing: more people are dying of cancer now per capita than ever before, and nothing is slowing the increase. Not early detection, not better
screenings, not new high tech machines, not radiation, not surgery, and definitely not chemotherapy.
Backtracking a little, in 1900 cancer was practically unheard of in this country. By 1950, there were about 150 cases of
cancer per 100,000 population. In 1971, Nixon introduced the War on Cancer, opening the floodgates of massive research funding backed by the government. This situation escalated until by the 1980s, over $50 billion per year was
being spent to "find the cure." And yet we have the plain data in the chart above. What is going on?
Tim O'Shea in TO THE CANCER PATIENT
The five year cancer survival statistics of the American Cancer Society are very misleading. They now count things that are not cancer, and because we are
able to diagnose at an earlier stage of the disease, patients falsely appear to live longer. Our whole cancer research in the past 20 years has been a failure. More people over 30 are dying from cancer than ever before... More
women with mild or benign diseases are being included in statistics and reported as being 'cured'. When government officials point to survival figures and say they are winning the war against cancer they are using those
survival rates improperly.
Dr John Bailer, who spent 20 years on the staff of the U.S. National Cancer Institute and was editor of its journal,
speaking at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in May 1985
The five year survival rates for the major cancers are: stomach - 5%, trachea, bronchus and lung - 5%, breast - 50%, oesophagus - 5%,
large intestine - 22%, pancreas - 4%, liver - 2% ... [A]ttacking the tumor with the slash/burn/poison version of cancer therapy, and then pronouncing "cured" after the five year survival period has
elapsed, has, of course, nothing remotely to do with the successful treatment of the disease. Patients who die from the effects of chemo or radio "therapy" after more than five years have passed are
counted as cured. Being dead or dying does not exclude one from the figures of the cancer industry's creative statisticians.
British Anti-Vivisection Association
Approximately 1500 people (in Germany alone) die each day from cancer, treated to death in an atrocious manner
with chemo and morphine ... According to the official statistics published by the German research centre on cancer in Heidelberg (Professor Abel), 98% of patients treated with chemo die within 7 years; 95% ... within 5
years. With the Germanische Neue Medizin however, 98% of those patients who did not previously receive treatments with chemo and morphine, survive. To deprive our patients
of a 98% chance of survival is not worthy of medicine and criminal!
Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer, founder of German New Medicine®
[M]y grandmother ... had breast cancer and did the radiations. Only several years after she finished the
radiations, I learnt about the researchs (including one that was published in The Lancet), that one of the side effects of the radiations is stroke. That way, people who die of stroke
do not enter into the statistics of cancer death. So we "beat cancer" they tell us, "the statistics shows less cancer deaths thanks to radiations" but more stroke deaths from this
same treatment. They don't tell us that.
If I had known that before, my grandmother wouldn't have done the radiations. We did save her from the Tamoxifen which we knew causes cancer, and so she didn't agree to
take it when the doctor gave it to her.
She also didn't agree to remove the lymph nodes because we knew it causes cancer to spread. But about the stroke from radiations, we didn't know, and not about alternatives.
My grandmother died of brain stroke. I would put money that it's from the radiation treatments she went through. Ignorance is our tragedy.
Anonymous
Doctors are too busy to dig into the statistics of cancer treatments, they assume that what they are taught at
school or what is demonstrated in the pages of briefing journals is the best treatment. They cannot afford to suspect that these treatments are only the best for the pharmaceutical companies that influence their 'institutions
of higher learning'.
Paul Winter, The Cancell Home Page
After one recent survey two pathologists reported that after carrying out 400 post-mortem examinations they had
found that in more than half the patients the wrong diagnosis had been made. This presumably also means that in more than half the patients the wrong treatment had been given. And since so many modern treatments are
undeniably powerful it also presumably means that a large proportion of those patients died because of their treatment. The two pathologists reported that potentially treatable disease was missed in one in seven patients. They
found that 65 out of 134 cases of pneumonia had gone unrecognised while out of 51 patients who had suffered heart attacks doctors had failed to diagnose the problem in 18 cases.
Dr. Vernon Coleman, M.D., D. Sc., author of 114 books with translations into 23
languages selling in over 50 countries
From Dr. Vernon Coleman’s article Modern Medicine is not a science
Compare On Conventional Cancer Treatment and On Chemotherapy.
|
|
