Why Alternative Cancer Treatment

The use of animals in cancer research has been attacked as unnecessary cruelty to animals, and defended as absolutely essential for research progress....From a scientific standpoint, what is pertinent is that what are called 'animal model systems' in cancer research have been a total failure....The moral is that animal model systems not only kill animals, they also kill humans. There is no good factual evidence to show that the use of animals in cancer research has led to the prevention or cure of a single human cancer.
Dr. Irwin D. Bross Ph.D. in "Animals in Cancer Research: A Multi-Billion Dollar Fraud"

Introductory note by Healing Cancer Naturally: The following article while written for a New Zealand readership some twenty years ago seems to have worldwide and timeless relevance and application. It covers most of the major points related to animal experimentation and the vital question whether animal-based cancer research saves or destroys human lives. Highly recommended reading.

1999 Cancer Research Review

by New Zealand Anti-Vivisection Society NZAVS, November 1999

Summary
Introduction
Current state of cancer research in New Zealand
Balance of research into various aspects of cancer
Areas of future growth in cancer research
Appropriate strategies and mechanisms for funding cancer research
Ways the cancer society should adapt to changing patterns of cancer research
Ways to improve the dissemination of the knowledge and advances gained from cancer research
Other aspects of cancer research which should be considered
Recommendations
Appendix A: Centre for scientific information on vivisection (CIVIS) principles
Appendix B: A sample of medical opinions on cancer research using animals
Appendix C: Further information sources

1) Summary

Animal experimentation in cancer research has not resulted in any advances. Vivisection can not lead to any advances in cancer research due to the inability to extrapolate results across species and the problems of causing a disease in order to study it because an introduced disease is not the same as a spontaneous one. Animal experimentation itself is a cause of cancer and can lead to the onset of cancers.

The New Zealand public demands the abolition of vivisection. Continuation of vivisection will lead to funds for cancer research no longer being available. Publication of easily discredited propaganda promoting supposed benefits of vivisection brings the scientific community into disrepute and undermines public faith in science.

Therapies which appear to be economical and effective seem to being ignored, if research into these therapies occurs it must not be animal research nor should these therapies be compared to currently used therapies on the basis of animal experiments.

2) Introduction

The New Zealand Anti-Vivisection Society is an incorporated society formed by Bette Overell in 1978. We have members and supporters throughout the country and around the world. The Society's aims are to actively campaign for the abolition of vivisection on the grounds that it is medical and scientific fraud.

We have adopted the CIVIS Principles originally written by our Patron, Hans Ruesch as our policy on vivisection. (Refer Appendix A).

Our Society has presented two Petitions to Parliament, in 1984 calling for the abolition of the LD50 Test and in 1989 calling for the abolition of vivisection on the grounds of scientific and medical fraud. 100,640 people signed the latter petition.

Our present campaign is the distribution of the book "Animal Research Takes Lives — Humans and Animals Both Suffer" written by Bette Overell, this work rebuts — using sourced scientific information — every false claim made in the booklet Animal Research Saves Lives, a flimsy piece of pro-vivisection propaganda produced by New Zealand's vivisection industry (The Cancer Society of New Zealand being one of the booklets' co-producers).

3) Current state of cancer research in New Zealand

Sickness care costs are bankrupting our economy. This is because we have a 'health' care system based on vivisection, which is scientifically invalid. Cancer research has been a failure. This is due to much research being based on vivisection. The cancer establishment refuses to consider working with anyone whose views or theories conflict with the establishment's agenda.

3.1) New Zealand spends over six billion dollars each year on what is euphemistically called "health care". After more than 100 years of massive animal-based research at a cost of countless billions of dollars, crippling and deadly diseases of all kinds are affecting an ever-increasing number of New Zealanders.

Far from curing anything we are losing ground in the fight against cancer and other diseases. Soaring "sickness care" costs are bankrupting our economy.

3.2) Animal research does not work, as every species of animal is a different biomechanical and biochemical entity. Non-human animals are different not only from humans, but also from each other: anatomically, physiologically, immunologically, genetically and histologically.

3.3) Animals react differently to different drugs, vaccines and chemical substances, not only from humans but also from each other. Aspirin kills cats and penicillin kills guinea pigs. Yet guinea pigs can safely eat strychnine — one of the deadliest poisons for humans but not for monkeys.

3.4) Human diseases cannot be recreated in animals because once a disease is "recreated" it is artificial and no longer the original, natural disease that the body itself produced.

3.5) Our environment — air, land, water and food supplies — is being systematically destroyed by thousands of pesticides and toxicants that no matter how destructive are routinely and conveniently found safe and thus allowed to be marketed based on inherently invalid and misleading animal tests.

3.6) The ethics committee system that 'rubber stamps' vivisection in this country is ineffective and was introduced merely to try and pacify public opposition to vivisection based on ethical grounds. It fails to address the public opposition to vivisection on scientific grounds.

3.7) It is estimated that in the United States of America 33% of people will be diagnosed with cancer during their lifetime. The incidence of cancer in USA has gone up 18 percent and the death rate 7 percent since President Nixon declared the "war on cancer" in 1971. After spending billions of dollars and decades of massive effort not only has cancer not been stopped but also its incidence has increased.
SUPRESS, "Cancer: Losing a war that could easily be won", The Vanguard, reprinted in The Guardian Newsletter (Australia), Vol. 3, No. 10, Spring 1997.

3.8) "During the past fifty years scientists experimenting with thousands of animals have found 700 ways of causing cancer. But they had not discovered one way of curing the disease."
Dr J.F. Brailsford M.D., Ph.D, Birmingham Evening Dispatch, U.K., January 10 1956.

3.9) "My overall assessment is that the national cancer programme must be judged a qualified failure."
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.

3.10) "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

3.11) "For thirty-five years U.S. scientists labouring in the National Cancer Institute's screening programme have injected more than 400,000 chemicals into leukaemic mice hoping to find chemotherapies that would help solve the riddles of cancer... We've been using the wrong system as the screening device."
David Korn, Chairman of the National Cancer Institute Advisory Board, "Giving Up on the Mice. Scientists Searching for Cancer-Cures Try A New Tactic", Time Magazine, September 17 1990.

3.12) Due to the use of animals, cancer research has been a failure.

3.13) The New Zealand cancer industry appears reluctant to adopt new ways of thinking and fails to even consider many areas that carry potential. For instance, "NO!" was the blunt reply given by the Cancer Society's Peter Dady in reply to television interviewer Paul Holmes' question in early 1999 about whether the Cancer Society was willing to work with 'alternative' therapists given that the 'alternative' therapists were willing to work alongside the Cancer Society.

4) Balance of research into various aspects of cancer

Cancer research on laboratory animals is prolific yet does not produce valid or useful results. It is generally accepted that a large proportion of cancers are preventable, yet funding for research into prevention is disproportionate. Meanwhile despite the emphasis on research for treatment, research funds and facilities are not made available for those who wish to study natural or holistic therapies.

4.1) "Almost all biomedical research being conducted today, including cancer research, is based on the animal model of human disease. Predictably the absurd concept that spontaneous diseases can be recreated in the laboratory and that human medicine can be based on veterinary medicine has brought us increases in both the incidences and death rates in practically all diseases, including cancer."
SUPRESS, "Cancer: Losing a war that could easily be won", The Vanguard, reprinted in The Guardian Newsletter (Australia), Vol. 3, No. 10, Spring 1997.

4.2) "Screening of over half a million compounds as anti-cancer agents on laboratory animals between 1970-85, only 80 compounds moved into clinical trials on humans. Of these only 24 had any anti-cancer activity and only 12 appeared to have a "substantial clinical role". But these so-called "new" active agents were not so new: they are analogues of chemotherapeutic agents already known to work in humans."
Ronald Allison M.D., quoted in Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1992, page 6

4.3) "Despite the general recognition that 85 per cent of all cancers is caused by environmental influences, less than 10 percent of the (U.S. ) National Cancer Institute budget is given to environmental causes.

And despite the recognition that the majority of environmental causes are linked to nutrition, less than one per cent of the NCI budget is devoted to nutrition studies. And even that small amount had to be forced on the Institute by a special amendment of the National Cancer Act in 1974."
Hans Ruesch, Naked Empress, CIVIS, Switzerland, 1992, page 77.

4.4) "According to the U.S. National Cancer Institute, approximately 80% of all cancers are preventable."
Moneim A. Fadali, M.D., USA, Animal Experimentation A Harvest of Shame, 1996, page 17.

4.5) "A shift in research emphasis from research on treatment to research on prevention is necessary if substantial progress against cancer is to be forthcoming".
"Progress Against Cancer", New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 314, page 1226, 1986.

4.6) "Despite the present emphasis on research of treatment rather than prevention holistic cancer treatment is never given a fair go anywhere in the Western world. There is no level playing field on which holistic health practitioners can work on equal terms with the Cancer Establishment.

Well-documented systems offering revolutionary possibilities of cure have been offered to the world's Cancer Establishment and rejected without a fair trial."
Chris Wheeler, "Who owns cancer?", The Self-Help Cancer Cure Book, Soil & Health, 1997, page 12.

4.7) "Natural Therapies are not scientifically proven to give better results than conventional treatment. Those controlling research funds and facilities give nothing to natural therapists to prove their case. In rare cases that natural remedies have been investigated by conventional medical institutions, it was done in such a way that a negative outcome was guaranteed."
Walter Last, "Scientific cancer treatment?", The Self-Help Cancer Cure Book, Soil & Health, 1997.

5) Areas of future growth in cancer research

Any future use of animals in cancer research will prove to be a failure. The New Zealand public demands abolition of vivisection on the grounds of medical and scientific fraud. Future research must be restricted to valid non-animal methods such as epidemiology. Study could be made of how animal research itself is responsible for cancer.

5.1) The use of animals in cancer research will, if continued, be a failure in the future. Due to the reasons outlined in section 4)

5.2) Further to that the New Zealand public demands abolition of vivisection as evidenced by the New Zealand Anti-Vivisection Society's Petition to Abolish Vivisection 1989 which attracted 100,640 signatures demanding an end to vivisection on scientific and medical grounds. The 'Hearing' of the Petition by the Primary Production Select Committee attracted over 700 submissions in support of the Petition.

5.3) Future research should be restricted to valid methods such as epidemiology. To help humans we need to study the cancers that occur in humans not in other animals in laboratory conditions.

One of the most natural ways of studying cancer in humans is that of observation. Observing what occurs spontaneously in as great a number of human models as possible scattered throughout the world. Epidemiology includes this kind of observation. This knowledge can enable preventative measures to be taken against cancers.

Epidemiology is not used more often as it does not give instant, extravagant returns. It takes time, demanding sincere participation and co-operation on the local, national and international level.

But fortunately in these days of computers and hi-tech global communications gathering data readily available in health institutions worldwide can facilitate epidemiology's job. Surely epidemiology must be looked upon as one of the key areas of future growth in cancer research.

5.4) Study should be made of cancer being caused by animal research.

5.4.1) Cancer in animal research workers, contracted through laboratory experiments.

The contents of many laboratories represent a bizarre cocktail of viruses, biological reagents, chemicals, cancer agents and different species of animal.

In 1986 the Institut Pasteur set up an external commission of inquiry to investigate three cases of bone cancer among staff at the same laboratory at the Institut. Two of those affected had died that year, and colleagues suspected that the cases might be linked to work on oncogenic viruses. One of the fatalities had been working on a project to bring about the transformation of mouse embryo carcinoma cells.

In 1987, the London Hazards Centre reported that in at least one school, carcinogenic fumes have been regularly released into the classroom by the methods used to soften rats' brains for dissection.
Biohazard — the Silent Threat from Biomedical Research, National Anti-Vivisection Society (U.K.), 1987.

5.4.2) Cancer due to environmental pollution caused by animal research

The use of animals in toxicological testing allows chemicals to be released or to remain on the market even though they may cause cancer in humans.

Because animal tests are so ambiguous, studies are often repeated; debates over test results are so drawn out that regulation is delayed. Products typically remain on the market until decisions are reached.

Even when positive human toxicity data are available, as in the case of benzene and DDT, chemicals are not withdrawn. Regulatory scientists habitually seek to confirm human findings in animals before regulatory steps are taken.

For further information on the dangers of toxicity testing on animals and valid methods that can be used, refer Alix Fano, Lethal Laws — Animal Testing, Human Health and Environmental Policy, Zed Books, 1998.

5.4.3) Cancer caused by vivisection-based farming.

Vivisection and Farming... The Connection

Antibiotics, growth hormones, drenches, vaccinations, worm-killing chemicals, weight and profit producing drugs, pesticides, insecticides, tranquillisers, fungicides are all tested on animals.

"Of the 143 drugs and pesticides identified as likely to leave residues in raw meat and poultry, forty-two are known to cause or are suspected of causing cancer; twenty of causing birth defects and six of causing mutations."
Jim Mason, Brave New Farm

"Cancer Prevention
A vegetarian diet helps prevent cancer. Studies of vegetarians show that death rates from cancer are only about one-half to three-quarters of those of the general population.

Breast cancer rates are dramatically lower in countries where diets are typically plant-based. When people from those countries adopt a Western, meat-based diet, their rates of breast cancer soar.
Vegetarians also have significantly less colon cancer than meat eaters. Meat consumption is more closely associated with colon cancer than any other dietary factor.

Why do vegetarian diets help protect against cancer? First, they are lower in fat and higher in fiber than meat-based diets. But other factors are important, too. For example, vegetarians usually consume more of the plant pigment beta-carotene. This might help to explain why they have less lung cancer. Also, at least one study has shown that natural sugars in dairy products may raise the risk for ovarian cancer in some women.

Some of the anti-cancer aspects of a vegetarian diet cannot yet be explained. For example, researchers are not quite sure why vegetarians have more of certain white blood cells, called "natural killer cells," which are able to seek out and destroy cancer cells."
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, Vegetarian Starter Kit

Compare Vegetarians live longer.

5.4.4) Cancer caused by vivisection-sanctioned drugs.

A small sample of drugs which despite being tested on animals were marketed and have been linked with human cancer:

5.4.4.1) Chloramphenicol

"Responsible for causing leukemia and fatal aplastic anaemia in human beings. Damage not predicted by animal experiments."
Ralph Heywood, 1990

"Extensive experiments on dogs failed to show evidence of injury or disease to the canine species."
Bulletin, Easton, Massachusetts, 2 April 1953.

5.4.4.2) Tagamet (Cimetidine)

Produced by SmithKline & French in 1977 after extensive testing on dogs, rabbits, hamsters, mice and rats, none of which gave signs of stomach cancer. By 1981 the British Committee for the Safety of Medicine had received 2,459 reports of adverse reactions which includes headaches, dizziness, skin disorders, psychiatric disorders, liver disorders, tremor, abdominal pain, nausea and diarrhoea and 21 reports of stomach cancer.

"Despite there being no signs of stomach cancer in animals on which the drug was tested, there could be an increased risk of stomach cancer on the human patients to whom it is prescribed."
Reed et al, Lancet, Vol. 2, 12 September 1981, page 550

5.4.4.3) Diethylstilbestrol

"Diethylstilbestrol, tested without adverse effects on animals for years, caused cancer in girls whose mothers had been prescribed the drug in pregnancy. Hundreds of women developed vaginal cancer because their mothers were given DES in pregnancy."
Time Magazine, 23 March 1980.

5.4.4.4) Monkey-based polio vaccine

In the 1960s two and a half million New Zealanders were vaccinated with contaminated monkey-based polio vaccine.

"It cannot be ruled out that two million New Zealanders could not be suffering in thirty years' time from cancerous brain tumours as a result of the vaccinations."
Dr A. Malcolme, then Minister of Health

A recent study by Dr Janet Butel published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, USA, suggests that the SV40 cancer causing virus which contaminated the polio vaccine are being passed from those given the contaminated vaccine to their children.

According to Professor Gordon McVie, the director general of the Cancer Research Campaign (U.K.), researchers have so far uncovered evidence linking SV40 to a number of cancers, including brain tumours and bone cancer.

"I've a feeling that the virus might be implicated in more, such as non-Hodgkin lymphoma and prostate cancer", he said.
Sunday Telegraph (U.K.), 14 February 1999, page 7.

5.4.5) Deaths caused by vivisection-based cancer drugs:

"From a scientific standpoint, what is pertinent that what are called 'animal model systems' in cancer research have been a total failure... Not a single essential new drug for the treatment of human cancer was picked up by the animal model system... Thus the tens of millions of animals killed in the mass screening for new cancer drugs died in vain...

Two high-powered promoters were pushing a study which used a particular drug called '5-FU'. They presented animal data to support their claims for using this drug on human breast cancer. In our studies which included 5-FU, the doctors had unanimously decided to drop it because there was no sign of benefit but very serious toxicity...

My efforts to head off the poisoning of hundreds of women with breast cancer, with a dangerous drug that could destroy their host defence systems failed. The National Cancer Institute went right ahead with its plan to fund this deadly study and others like it. Not a few women with breast cancer have paid with their lives for this stupidity... animal model systems not only kill animals, they also kill humans."
Irwin Bross, Ph.D, Director of Biostatistics, Roswell Park Memorial Institute, New York, "Animals in Cancer Research a Multi-Billion Dollar Fraud", reprinted from Fundamental and Applied Toxicology, November 1982.

5.5) Any human experimentation must not use vivisectionist methods such as causing the disease in order to study it.

6) Appropriate strategies and mechanisms for funding cancer research

6.1) Zero funding to be allocated to research involving animals.

7) Ways the cancer society should adapt to changing patterns of cancer research

Continuation of funding and promoting vivisection will make it harder for the Cancer Society to extract public donations and sponsorship. The Cancer Society should publicly retract the leaflet it co-published titled 'Animal Research Saves Lives'.

The Cancer Society should institute a written policy denouncing the use of animals in cancer research as medically and scientifically invalid. The Cancer Society should institute a written policy of no funding any research using animals. The Cancer Society should be lobbying for the abolition of vivisection on medical and scientific grounds.

7.1) The New Zealand Anti-Vivisection Society has withstood all attempts by the likes of the Cancer Society and its cronies to demolish NZAVS. NZAVS will go from strength to strength as it seeks abolition of vivisection.

As part of this process the New Zealand public will learn of the medical and scientific fraud of vivisection and it will become increasingly more difficult for the Cancer Society to obtain public donations and sponsorship as the public realises the role of the Cancer Society in its attempts to perpetuate medical and scientific fraud.

7.2) Further attempts to block legal channels for those working for the abolition of vivisection will see an increase in the activities of groups who partake in (sometimes illegal) direct actions such as the Animal Liberation Front. This may impact on the fundraising work of the Cancer Society as well as possibly destroying the 'research work' of vivisectors funded by the Cancer Society.

7.3) To avoid the loss of public donations and sponsorship and the possibility of actions by groups such as the Animal Liberation Front, we recommend the following:

7.3.1) The Cancer Society should publicly retract the leaflet it co-published titled 'Animal Research Saves Lives' . This booklet has been shown up as being merely emotional, unsubstantiated claims and blatant lies about supposed benefits of vivisection. Every claim made in the booklet has been demolished using sourced scientific evidence in Bette Overell's "Animal Research Takes Lives — Humans and Animals Both Suffer".

7.3.2) The Cancer Society should institute written policy to the following effect:

"The Cancer Society condemns research using animals as a hindrance to medical progress and a danger to human patients on the grounds that it is impossible to extrapolate between the species and it is also medically and scientifically invalid to cause a disease in order to study it."

7.3.3) The Cancer Society should institute written policy to the following effect:

"The Cancer Society will not fund or promote research using animals on the grounds that the use of animals to study human disease is medically and scientifically fraudulent."

7.3.4) The Cancer Society should publicly denounce all research using animals in supposed cancer research as being scientifically invalid and recognise it as bringing science and cancer research into disrepute, destroying public faith and confidence.

7.3.5) The Cancer Society should be lobbying at the highest possible levels for the abolition of vivisection on the grounds that it is medical and scientific fraud.

8) Ways to improve the dissemination of the knowledge and advances gained from cancer research

8.1) Publishing easily-discredited lies about supposed benefits of animal research brings science into disrepute and destroys public faith and confidence in cancer research.

8.2) The public is weary of news stories timed to coincide with fundraising events of latest cancer breakthroughs (often involving vivisection) that may lead to a cure for cancer.

8.3) The Cancer Society must cease its blatant lying and attempts to mislead the public.

9) Other aspects of cancer research which should be considered

A huge range of therapies and potential therapies for cancer appear to be ignored by the cancer establishment (refer for instance to the cases mentioned in the Soil & Health Association's Self-Help Cancer Cure Book). They appear to be effective and economical. If research into these therapies is to occur it must not be animal research. The therapies should not be measured against conventional therapies on the basis of animal data.

10) Recommendations

10.1) That funding and promotion of vivisection in cancer research be ceased immediately on the grounds that it is dangerous to extrapolate results across species.

10.2) That funding and promotion of all other vivisection be ceased immediately as its existence and application can lead to the onset of cancers.

10.3) Promotional materials published by the Cancer Society that endorse vivisection should be immediately publicly withdrawn.

10.4) That future research should concentrate on valid methods such as epidemiology that directly relate to the human condition.

10.5) Any human-based research undertaken must not adopt vivisectionist methods of causing a disease in order to study it, as results obtained from an introduced disease are not necessarily the same as those from a spontaneous disease.

10.6) Current therapies must not be evaluated against potential new, or already existing (outside of the mainstream) therapies on the basis of animal data.

10.7) Valid research should be conducted on the therapies already in existence that have been unscientifically ignored or discredited by the cancer establishment.

10.8) Failure to take up these recommendations will result in a further public loss of confidence in science and will bring cancer research into further disrepute. This will result in difficulties obtaining donations from the public, government grants and corporate sponsorship.

Appendix A
The Centre for scientific information on vivisection (CIVIS) Principles, originally written by Swiss medical historian Hans Ruesch, have been adopted by the New Zealand Anti-Vivisection Society (Inc.) as our policy on vivisection:

All animal experimentation must be rejected both on ethical and medical grounds.
Animal experiments destroy respect for life and harden the experimenter against the suffering of human patients.
Experiments on animals are not a proper way to diagnose, research or heal human ailments. The organic, anatomical, biological, metabolic, genetic and psychic differences between humans and animals are so substantial that knowledge obtained from animals is not only worthless but misleading.
Animal experiments are carried out only to the advantage of the experimenters themselves, of their commercial backers, and of the laboratory animal breeding industry. They perform an alibi function. There has never been a scientific statistical proof that their results are applicable to human beings.
Most of today's diseases are not organic in origin but have psychological, social, dietary, environmental, and malpractice causes. Official medical science therefore has no causal treatment to offer.

It can't even cure a common cold, rheumatism, arthritis, cancer, nor any other of the millenarian ills, which much rather it has multiplied, adding always new diseases (SMON, Herpes, AIDS). By trying only to get rid of the symptoms, it prevents recognition and elimination of the causes.
With its highest consumption of laboratory animals in the world America 'should' be the healthiest nation, but it is one of the sickest and ranks only 17th in life expectancy, behind several 'underdeveloped' countries where such experimentation is unknown.
Health care requires first of all prevention, furthermore the application of one or several disciplines that have been ignored by official medicine because of its obsession with animal experimentation, for example dietetics, psychosomatics, psychotherapy, clinical observation, environmentalism, epidemiology, vegetarianism, rehabilitation, homeopathy, osteopathy, chiropractic, naturopathy, naprapathy, macrobiotics, diathermy, oligotherapy, electrotherapy, hydrotherapy, heliotherapy, aromatherapy, faith healing, herbalism, acupuncture, fasting and more, which have proven effective, and economical to boot.
Medicine must concern itself with the entire person, adopt methods that relate to the causes and the patients, instead of a veterinary medicine applied to humans, which at best replaces acute symptoms with chronic illness, but often creates new ills.
The veterinary schools must follow the same humane principles: no artificial, violent interventions on healthy animals to inflict maladies and mutilations and to desensitise the students, but careful study and sympathetic treatment of spontaneous diseases and natural accidents.
For all these reasons, to demand the total abolition of all animal experimentation is not only possible but necessary.

Appendix B

A small sample of medical professionals' comments on animals in cancer research:

"It is not possible to apply to the human species, experimental information derived from inducing cancer in animals."
Dr Kenneth Starr, Hon. Director of the New South Wales Cancer Council, Sydney Morning Herald, 7 April 1960.

"The fact that experiments failed to demonstrate any carcinogenic activity in animals does not exclude the possibility of a carcinogenic effect in man."
British Medical Journal, 10 September 1955, p. 692

"It is time to end cancer research on animals because it is not related to humans."
Dr A. Sabin

"The characteristic effects in leukemia were detected solely as a result of clinical observation. The various leukemias in the mouse and rat were relatively refractory to the influence of urethane, and the remarkable effect in the human might have eluded discovery if attention had been directed to the animal alone. That illustrates the hazards of such work."
Prof. Alexander Haddow, British Medical Journal, 2 December 1950, page 1272.

"The drugs Prednisone and Vincristine are often hailed as 'curing' childhood leukemia. Both drugs were rejected by the US National Cancer Institute as 'useless' on the basis of animal tests.

Prednisone was developed as a result of clinical observation of the effects of adrenal extract. Vincristine is an alkaloid of 'Vincra Rosea', a type of periwinkle plant, and extracts of periwinkle were used in the Roman Empire to 'dry tumours' (Pliny). They were eventually brought to clinical trials. The children cured of leukemia owe their lives to clinical observations and trials — and not to the animal 'model'."
Brandon Reines, DVM, Cancer Research on Animals: Impact and Alternatives.

"The history of cancer research has been one of curing cancer in the mouse. We have cured mice of cancer for decades — and it simply hasn't worked in humans."
Dr Richard Klausner, director of the U.S. National Cancer Institute, The Press, 8 May 1998, page 5.

"Sir, In arguing for the health benefits of Enzogenol, an antioxidant supplement, Kelvin Duncan appears to dismiss the value of well conducted clinical trials on humans as an expensive standard of proof. Instead he seems to be willing to extrapolate the results of animal experiments directly to humans and to generalise from his own subjective experience with Ezogenol. All this from the Dean of Science at Canterbury University"
Dr Lynette Murdoch, Dr Tim Wilkinson, Letter to the Editor, The Press, 28 July 1998, page 4.

Appendix C: Further information sources

For further information refer to the following sources:

Animal Research Takes Lives — Humans and Animals Both Suffer, NZAVS, 1993, Bette Overell
Submission in Support of NZAVS Petition to Abolish Vivisection, NZAVS, 1991
Slaughter of the Innocent, Hans Ruesch
1000 Doctors (and many more) Against Vivisection, CIVIS, 1989, Hans Ruesch
CIVIS Bullet-in Nr. 2 — The Infiltration in Animal Welfare, CIVIS, 1988, Hans Ruesch
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (www.pcrm.org/)
'Vivisection or Science?', Prof. Pietro Croce, Zed, 1999
Heart Research on Animals, AAVS, 1985
Lethal Laws, Alix Fano, Zed Books 1998
Naked Empress, Hans Ruesch
Animal Experimentation — A Harvest of Shame, Moneim A. Fadali
Campaign Against Fraudulent Medical Research
Medical Research Modernization Committee (www.mrmcmed.org/)
Soil & Health, The Self-Help Cancer Cure Book (Self Help Cancer Cure by Walter Last, Chris Wheeler, Max Yelsaeb, $25.00)

www.nzavs.org.nz | 2003

... and for the best, easiest, and least expensive ways healingcancernaturally.com knows to heal cancer

after studying the subject for some twenty years, click here.