History of Alternative Cancer Treatment (1)

To illustrate the genesis of the public health situation with regard to the “orthodox” or conventional cancer treatment we have today, here is a series of articles providing deep insights into what has come to be classified as “alternative” (and often suppressed) treatment modalities:

The true story of the frequently successful Hoxsey cancer remedy and the suppression of the Royal Rife treatment, together with much background information on what has been justly termed “the cancer industry”.

In addition to the "older" cancer and health researchers featured here who successfully employed non-conventional and/or holistic approaches to healing cancer and who were (equally "successfully") persecuted by vested financial/medical interests, there are other including more recent examples such as Dr. Johanna Budwig, Dr. Josef Issels, Dr. Dr. Johannes Kuhl, Dr. Dr. Gyula de Szilvay, Dr. Dr. Paul G. Seeger, Dr. Leiprecht, Dr. Smend, Dr. Finke, Dr. Wilhelm Reich (who died in prison), and Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer, with the latter until recently serving another prison sentence. Others include Dr. Emanuel Revici (see the book The Doctor Who Cures Cancer), oncologist Dr. Tullio Simoncini (see sodium bicarbonate cancer treatment) who lost his license, Dr. Koch, H. E. Sartori, M.D., author of the book "Cancer - Orwellian or Utopian", also thrown into prison (you can read about Dr. Sartori's use of cesium therapy in Cesium Chloride [High pH Therapy]: A Cure for Cancer?) as well as other physicians who dared to think outside the orthodox box.

Perhaps it could be provocatively asked: “Has healing cancer been considered a crime (against profit-making vested interest groups)?”

The Hoxsey Legend

by Kenny Ausubel, author of When Healing Becomes a Crime: The Amazing Story of the Hoxsey Cancer Clinics and the Return of Alternative Therapies

In 1840 Illinois horse farmer John Hoxsey found his prize stallion with a malignant tumor on its right hock. As a Quaker, he couldn't bear shooting the animal, so he put it out to pasture to die peacefully. Three weeks later, he noticed the tumor stabilizing, and observed the animal browsing knee-deep in a corner of the pasture with a profusion of weeds, eating plants not part of its normal diet.

Within three months the tumor dried up and began to separate from the healthy tissue. The farmer retreated to the barn, where he began to experiment with these herbs revealed to him by "horse sense." He devised three formulas: an internal tonic, an herbal-mineral red paste, and a mineral-based yellow powder for external use. Within a year the horse was well, and the veterinarian became locally famous for treating animals with cancer.

The farmer's grandson John C. Hoxsey, a veterinarian in southern Illinois, was the first to try the remedies on people, and claimed positive results. His son Harry showed an early interest and began working with him at the age of eight. When John suffered an untimely accident, he bequeathed the formulas to the fifteen-year-old boy with a charge to treat poor people for free, and to minister to all races, creeds, and religions without prejudice.

He asked that the treatment carry the Hoxsey name. Finally, he warned the boy against the "High Priests of Medicine" who would fight him tooth-and-nail because he was taking money out of their pockets.

Hoxsey planned to go to medical school to bring the treatment to the world, but soon found he had been blackballed after secretly treating several terminal patients who pled for their lives. With a local banker backing him, he founded the first Hoxsey Cancer Clinic in 1924, championed by the chamber of commerce and high school marching bands on Main Street.

As early word of his reputed successes spread, Hoxsey was invited to nearby Chicago, headquarters of the newly powerful AMA, to demonstrate the treatment. Grisly and indisputable photographic proof of the terminal case Hoxsey treated verifies that the patient recovered, living on for twelve years, cancer-free.

Hoxsey then claimed that a high AMA official offered him a contract for the rights to the formulas. The alleged agreement assigned the property rights to a consortium of doctors including Dr. Morris Fishbein, the AMA chief and editor of the JAMA. Hoxsey himself would be required to cease any further practice, to be awarded a small percentage of profits after ten years if the treatment panned out.

Invoking his Quaker father's deathbed charge that poor people be treated for free and that the treatment carry the family name, Hoxsey said the official threatened to hound him out of business unless he acquiesced.

Whatever may have happened, that's when the battle started.

The AMA first denied the entire incident, then later acknowledged the patient's remission, though crediting it to prior treatments by surgery and radiation.

Yet one thing was certain: Hoxsey had made a very powerful enemy. By crossing swords with Fishbein, he alienated the most powerful figure in medicine. The AMA promptly dubbed him the worst cancer quack of the century, and he would be arrested more times than any other person in medical history.

Hoxsey quickly found himself opposing Fishbein's emerging medical-corporate complex.

As late as 1900, medicine was therapeutically pluralistic and financially unprofitable.

Doctors had the highest suicide rate of any profession owing to their extreme poverty and low social standing.

Fishbein's AMA would engineer an industrialized medical monoculture.

What radically tipped the balance of power was an arranged marriage between big business and organized medicine.

Under Fishbein's direction, the AMA sailed into a golden harbor of prosperity fueled by surgery, radiation, drugs, and a sprawling high-tech hospital system.

The corporatization of medicine throttled diversity. The code word for competition was quackery.

It was easy for the medical profession to paint Hoxsey as a quack: he fit the image perfectly.

Brandishing his famed tonic bottle, the ex-coal miner arrived straight from central casting as the stereotype of the snake-oil salesman.

When the AMA coerced the pathologist who performed Hoxsey's biopsies to cease and desist, Hoxsey could no longer verify the validity of his reputed successes.

Organized medicine quickly adopted the stance that his alleged "cures" fell into three categories: those who never had cancer in the first place; those who were cured by prior radiation and surgery; and those who died.

In exasperation, Hoxsey attempted an end run by approaching the National Cancer Institute.

In close collaboration with the AMA, the federal agency refused his application for a test because his medical records did not include all the biopsies.

Meanwhile Hoxsey struck oil in Texas and used his riches to promote his burgeoning clinic and finance his court battles.

Piqued at Hoxsey's rise, Fishbein struck back in the public media, penning an inflammatory article in the Hearst Sunday papers entitled "Blood Money," in a classic example of purple prose and yellow journalism.

Outraged, Hoxsey sued Fishbein.

In two consecutive trials, Hoxsey beat Fishbein, standing as the first person labeled a "quack" to defeat the AMA in court.

During the trials, Hoxsey's lawyers revealed that Fishbein had failed anatomy in medical school, never completed his internship, and never practiced a day of medicine in his entire career.

By now Fishbein was mired in multiple scandals, including his effective but unpopular obstruction of national health insurance at a time when doctors had become the richest professionals in the country and the Journal the most profitable publication in the world.

Drug ads powered JAMA, but its biggest single advertiser in the 1940s was Phillip Morris.

(Camel cigarettes had the largest booth at the AMA's 1948 convention, boasting in its ads that "More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette.")

Enmeshed in controversy, Fishbein's stock was trading low, and, shortly after his first loss to Hoxsey, the AMA chief was deposed in a humiliating spectacle.

But ironically Hoxsey's stunning dark-horse victory against the "most terrifying trade organization on Earth" only ended up bringing the house down.

He immediately faced a decade-long "quackdown" by the FDA.

By the 1950s, Hoxsey was riding what was arguably the largest alternative-medicine movement in American history.

A survey by the Chicago Medical Society showed 85 percent of people still using "drugless healers."

Hoxsey's Dallas stronghold grew to be the world's largest privately owned cancer center with 12,000 patients and branches spreading to seventeen states.

Congressmen, judges, and even some doctors ardently supported his quest for an investigation.

Two federal courts upheld the therapeutic value of the treatment.

Even his archenemies, the American Medical Association and the Food and Drug Administration, admitted that the therapy does cure certain forms of cancer.

JAMA itself had published the research of a respected physician who got results superior to surgery using a red paste identical to Hoxsey's for skin cancers including lethal melanoma, a skin cancer that also spreads internally.

Medical authorities escalated their quackdown in the McCarthyite wake of the 1950s.

On the heels of a California law criminalizing all cancer treatments except surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy, the federal government finally outlawed Hoxsey entirely in the United States in 1960 on questionable technicalities.

Chief nurse Mildred Nelson took the clinic to Tijuana in 1963, abandoning any hope of operating in the United States.

It was the first alternative clinic to set up shop south of the border.

Mildred quietly treated another 30,000 patients there until her death in 1999.

Like Hoxsey, she claimed a high success rate, but her contention is unverifiable since the treatment has yet to be rigorously tested.

Hoxsey never claimed a panacea or cure-all.

He maintained that the Dallas doctors used his clinic as a "dumping ground" for hopeless cases, and that the great majority of patients he got were terminal, having already had the limit of surgery and radiation.

He said he cured about 25 percent of those. Of virgin cases with no prior treatment, he claimed an 80 percent success rate.

Seventy-five years after Hoxsey began, why do we still not know the validity of his claims?

More on Hoxsey in History of Alternative Cancer Treatment (2)

Who Are The Quacks?


The American Cancer Society and the FDA have a list of "Unproven Methods" for cancer. As you might expect, the criteria for getting on this list are predictable:

  • in a natural form
  • non-toxic
  • not produced by the Drug Industry
  • easily available without a prescription
  • non-patentable

Even though chemotherapy and radiation and palladium implants are completely unproven themselves, and frequently are the cause of death themselves, they are not on the Unproven List. Why not? Because they're expensive, can be completely controlled, and are patentable. This last deserves some explanation.

In order for a drug to be approved by the FDA, the manufacturer must do years of studies, which may cost anywhere between 17 to 100 million dollars. (Day) Now if a company is going to spend that kind of money, they don't want some other company stealing their formula after they've gone to all that trouble developing it. Their guarantee is called a patent - legally it's their drug and no one can copy it for 17 years.

Do you think after all that trouble, a drug company wants somebody to come along with a totally cheap, available, and natural product which has the same effect as their drug, yet with none of the side effects? Of course not! And do you think they'll do everything they can both legally and politically to prevent natural products from reaching the market? You better believe it. Two books which best document some of the effective natural cures for cancer which have come along in the past 75 years and have faced a tidal wave of opposition from the FDA/AMA/Drug Trust are: Ralph Moss's The Cancer Industry and Richard Walters's Options (see under Books on the History of Alternative Cancer Treatments). Some of these natural cures are still around in the US, though they are under attack. Others can only be obtained in Mexico or Europe. And still others have been crushed out of existence for good by the Darth Vader faction. You can do the historical research yourself on some of the following products and innovators:

William Kelley, Hoxsey, Gaston Naessens, Max Gerson, Kurt Donsbach, William Koch, Dr. Burzynski, Dr Blass, Dr. Loffler, Stan Bynum, Patrick Flanagan, Microhydrin, 714x, Haelan, antineoplastons, raw foods, live cell therapy, ozone, EDTA chelation, Laetrile, Coley vaccines, Hydrazine sulfate, Hans Nieper, JH Tilden, whole foods vitamins, antioxidants, colon detoxification, the Rife machine, the black box, green foods - this is a partial list. Many names have been lost forever. Separately or in combination, these methods and these healers have resolved cancer in thousands of cases during the past 75 years. Some of the technology has been repressed out of existence - other methods are quite easy. What they have in common is that they are non-patentable generally natural methods which have no significant side effects, and work with one common goal: strengthen the immune system. If cancer is to be overthrown, only the body itself can do that.

The above names were not people whose first goal was to make personal fortunes and lock their discoveries away from those who wanted to copy them. The Drug Trust, which includes the pharmaceutical industry, The AMA, the FDA, and even the FTC, have what can only be described as a de facto monopoly on cancer treatment in this company. Their goal is not curing cancer or helping people die with dignity, or trying to discover a cure, or relieving pain, or giving Americans a better life. Their only focus is profit, and they have proven for the past century that there are no limits they will observe to secure their control of what has become an $90 billion per year industry. If this sounds harsh or paranoid, start perusing the appended reference list and tell me what you come up with. Or try and find one single treatment on the FDA's "Unproven Methods" list that is patentable as a drug.

Compare On Chemotherapy, On Cancer Business, On Cancer Research, On Drugs.

How Cancer Politics Have Kept You in the Dark Regarding Successful Alternatives

by John Diamond, M.D, Lee Cowden, M.D.

A powerful conglomerate of government agencies, international drug companies, and major cancer treatment hospitals puts profits first. They do not want the public to learn about and pursue effective alternatives. The result is that chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery are the law of the land as cancer treatments-for political, not therapeutic, reasons. Most of what you have heard over your lifetime about cancer treatments is not the truth. At the very least, you have received an incomplete picture. If you believe the propaganda you have been fed and you develop cancer; it can cost you your life. In the United States, economic interests masquerade as therapeutic regimens and scientific concern. Their goal is to own and completely control a disease-cancer-as if it were a commodity, and to quash competition (meaning alternative approaches), so as to maintain a marketplace monopoly. Money leads politics by the nose. The financial interests of drug companies, conventional cancer doctors, hospitals, HMOs and others in what is known as the Cancer Establishment, have eclipsed the integrity of the Hippocratic Oath; money and politics have proclaimed conventional approaches as scientifically validated and therefore mandated by law. The terrible flaw in this convenient financial setup is that the profits that flow to the cancer establishment are derived from human lives lost to cancer be cause successful alternative approaches are outlawed or unreported. To the cancer establishment, a cancer patient is a profit center. The actual clinical and scientific evidence does not support the claims of the cancer industry. Conventional cancer treatments are in place as the law of the land because they pay, not heal, the best. Decades of the politics-of-cancer-as-usual have kept you from knowing this, and will continue to do so unless you wake up to their reality. Although rising cancer rates are bad news for patients, they are great news for the cancer treatment industry-Cancer, Inc., as some critics have labeled it. In this environment, words that sound scientific and doctorly often mask a different agenda. The phrase "treatment success" can mean profitable, while "dangerous" or "questionable" treatment can refer to therapies that threaten the profits of the cancer industry. When you begin to ferret out the economic context and motivations of cancer treatment, it helps you understand why alternative cancer therapies are suppressed or barred from the public's awareness. It helps you see why treatments as dangerous and consistently unsuccessful as radiation and chemotherapy continue to dominate the field of oncology. The reason alternative cancer treatments are not mainstream has little to do with alleged therapeutic ineffectiveness and far more to do with political control over the therapy marketplace. The politics of cancer have an overriding influence on the science of cancer and, ultimately, on what the public thinks and believes about cancer and what it is able to expect as treatment options. The doctors who perform cancer treatments and the scientists who conduct research are not the ones in control of the cancer field. It is the larger power structure of the cancer establishment that effectively controls the shape and direction of cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment.' The field of U.S. cancer care is organized around a medical monopoly that ensures a continuous flow of money to the pharmaceutical companies, medical technology firms, research institutes, and government agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and quasi-public organizations such as the American Cancer Society (ACS). This is "the cancer industry," says Ralph Moss, Ph.D., extensions of which include the corporate media, public relations experts, petrochemical and nuclear industries, corporate scientists, and doctors who specialise in "killing" cancer. Cancer research has been set up almost entirely in favor of conventional approaches ever since the war on cancer, formalized in 1971 as the National Cancer Act, was first scripted in the 1960s. At that time, Senator Ralph Yarborough (D-Texas) organized the National Panel of Consultants of the Conquest of Cancer Of its 26 members, 10 came from the American Cancer Society and 4 were affiliated with Memorial Sloan-Kettering Hospital; Benno Schmidt, M.D., the director of Memorial Sloan-Kettering's Cancer Center was the panel's chairman, and Sidney Farber, M.D., former president of the ACS, was its vice chairman.

Excerpted from Alternative Medicine: The Definitive Guide to Cancer, page 643-647, more under Books.

Also compare On Conventional Cancer Treatment, On Alternative Cancer Treatment, On Chemotherapy, On Cancer Business, On Cancer Research, On Drugs.

Forbidden Cures - Suppressed 'Alternative' Therapies

by Ken Adachi

The Big Three [”Organized Medicine, the Food & Drug Administration, and their overlords in the Pharmaceutical Industry”] have collectively engaged in a medical conspiracy for the better part of 70 years to influence legislative bodies on both the state and federal level to create regulations that promote the use of drug medicine while simultaneously creating restrictive, controlling mechanisms (licencing, government approval, etc) designed to limit and stifle the availability of non-drug, alternative modalities. The conspiracy to limit and eliminate competition from non-drug therapies began with the Flexner Report of 1910.

Abraham Flexner was engaged by John D. Rockefeller to run around the country and ‘evaluate' the effectiveness of therapies taught in medical schools and other institutions of the healing arts. Rockefeller wanted to dominate control over petroleum, petrochemicals, and pharmaceuticals (which are derived from 'coal tars' or crude oil). He arranged for his company, Standard Oil of New Jersey to obtain a controlling interest in a huge German drug cartel called I. G. Farben. He pulled in his stronger competitors like Andrew Carnegie and JP Morgan as partners, while making other, less powerful players, stockholders in Standard Oil. Those who would not come into the fold "were crushed" according to a Rockefeller biographer (W. Hoffman, David: Report on a Rockefeller {New York: Lyle Stuart, Inc., 1971} page 24.)

The report Flexner submitted to The Carnegie Foundation was titled "Medical Education in the United States and Canada". Page 22 of the report said: "the privileges of the medical school can no longer be open to casual strollers from the highway. It is necessary to install a doorkeeper who will, by critical scrutiny, ascertain the fitness of the applicant, a necessity suggested, in the first place, but consideration for the candidate, whose time and talents will serve him better in some other vocation, if he be unfit for this, and in the second, by consideration for a public entitled to protection from those whom the very boldness of modern medical strategy equips with instruments that, tremendously effective for good when rightly used, are all the more terrible for harm if ignorantly or incompetently employed".

All too often, politicians are prepared to enact laws that rob citizens of yet another constitutional freedom under the banner of "public protection". Needless to say, congress swallowed the recommendations of this report hook, line, and sinker. It was decided that the American Medical Association (AMA), would be the "doorkeeper". The AMA was now empowered to certify or de-certify any medical school in the country on the grounds of whether that school met the AMA's standards of "approved" medicine.

The AMA came into existence in 1847. It is a private organization of allopathic physicians which serves the interests of its members, especially when it comes to influencing favorable legislation. It functions in every sense of the word as a union, although its members wear white collars instead of blue. Giving the AMA the power over the certification of medical schools is the equivalent of giving the Teamsters Union the exclusive right to decide on the laws of interstate commerce and transportation. Is it any wonder that the total number of medical schools in the United States went from 160 in 1906 (before the Flexner Report) to 85 in 1920 and further down to 69 schools in 1944? A little like putting the fox in charge of the hen house, no?

Not surprisingly, Flexner ‘found' that any discipline that didn't use drugs to help cure the patient was tantamount to quackery and charlatanism. Medical schools that offered courses in bioelectric Medicine, Homeopathy or Eastern Medicine, for example, were told to either drop these courses from their curriculum or lose their accreditation and underwriting support. A few schools resisted for a time, but eventually most schools cooperated (or were closed down). A similar scenario was played out in Canada. It was attempted in England against Homeopathy, but it failed due to the personal intervention of the Royal Family who had received much relief and healing at the hands of Homeopathic healers in the 19th century. By the way, the AMA was found guilty of conspiracy against chiropractors in 1987 by a federal judge and fined a couple of million dollars.

Here in America, a relentless campaign of misinformation, fraud, deception, and suppression of alternative therapies and healers has been in place for the better part of this century in order to keep highly effective alternative therapies from reaching any significant plateau of public awareness. Control is exerted through "news items" and propaganda from pro-establishment organizations like The American Medical Association, The American Cancer Society, The Diabetes Foundation, etc.; local medical boards; and government agencies like the FDA, The National Institute of Health (NIH), and The National Cancer Institute (NCI), The National Academy of Science, etc. with the full cooperation of main-stream media of course .

Over the past decades, hundreds of caring, concerned, and conscientious alternative healers have been jailed and abused like common criminals for the "crime" of curing people of life-threatening diseases in an "unapproved" manner by heavy-handed government agents who swoop down on clinics with drawn guns, flax jackets, and Gestapo manners. All the while, these same agents and agencies posture themselves before TV cameras and the public under the ludicrous pretense of being servants of the people and protectors of the common good.

The medico-drug cartel was summed up by J.W. Hodge, M.D., of Niagara Falls, N.Y., in these words: 'The medical monopoly or medical trust, euphemistically called the American Medical Association, is not merely the meanest monopoly ever organized, but the most arrogant, dangerous and despotic organization which ever managed a free people in this or any other age. Any and all methods of healing the sick by means of safe, simple and natural remedies are sure to be assailed and denounced by the arrogant leaders of the AMA doctors' trust as fakes, frauds and humbugs Every practioner of the healing art who does not ally himself with the medical trust is denounced as a 'dangerous quack' and impostor by the predatory trust doctors. Every sanitarian who attempts to restore the sick to a state of health by natural means without resort to the knife or poisonous drugs, disease imparting serums, deadly toxins or vaccines, is at once pounced upon by these medical tyrants and fanatics, bitterly denounced, vilified and persecuted to the fullest extent.' (See The Drug Story for more revelations about the AMA, the House of Rockefeller and the pharmaceutical industry.)

At long last, however, the public's consciousness seems to have finally reached a critical mass and is now beginning to seriously question the efficacy and appropriateness of using orthodox therapies and allopathic medicine in general. Thank God.

Sponsored Links

Related content

Concise quotes:

Related section


Copyright © 2004-2018 and respective authors.
Unauthorized republishing of content is strictly forbidden. Each and every breach of copyright will be pursued to the fullest extent of the law.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to the disclaimer.