The Cancer
Industry is Too Prosperous to Allow a Cure
April 14, 2018
Health Impact News
Editor Comments
We have lost the war on cancer. At the beginning of
the last century, one person in twenty would get cancer. In the 1940s it was
one out of every sixteen people. In the 1970s it was one person out of ten.
Today one person out of three gets cancer in the course of their life.
The cancer industry is probably the most
prosperous business in the United States. In 2014, there was an
estimated 1,665,540 new cancer cases diagnosed and 585,720 cancer deaths in the
US. $6 billion of tax-payer funds are cycled through various federal
agencies for cancer research, such as the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The NCI
states that the medical costs of cancer care are $125 billion, with a projected
39 percent increase to $173 billion by 2020.
The simple fact is that the cancer industry employs too
many people and produces too much income to allow a cure to be found. All of
the current research on cancer drugs is based on the premise that the cancer
market will grow, not shrink.
John Thomas explains to us why the current cancer
industry prospers while treating cancer, but cannot afford to cure
it.
Cancer Makes Too Much Money to Cure
by John P. Thomas
Health Impact News
My Personal
Introduction to Conventional Cancer Treatment Began in 1995
The surgeon pointed his pen at a large tumor on the CAT
scan and began to explain the procedure for removing the colon cancer. He then
paused for a moment and said to my wife, “This isn’t your biggest problem.” He
then began to tap his pen on three small points that were visible on the image
of her liver. “These are a much bigger problem, because we can’t remove them
with surgery.”
Everyone we met at the University medical center was
compassionate and concerned for us. After the surgery, we met with the
oncologist. He explained the chemotherapy option. He told my wife, “You have 6
months to one year to live if you do chemotherapy. If you don’t do
chemotherapy, then you have 6 months to 1 year to live.” The only positive
reason that he could offer us for doing chemotherapy was that if by chance she
was in the group that only had 6 months to live, then it might extend her life
a few more months. We asked about alternative treatments, and he indicated that
none of them have proven beneficial. My wife opted to not do chemotherapy,
because she didn’t want to suffer the side effects of the drugs.
Many things were different in 1995 than they are today.
At that time, we did not have easy access to information about alternative
cancer treatments. We did learn about a few alternatives and tried some of
them, but the cancer kept growing. My wife refused to consider any alternative
that would require her to make major lifestyle changes. She was willing to try
therapies as long as she could keep working and could continue eating the
standard American diabetic diet, which was a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet.
She only became willing to consider other alternative treatments when she was
within a couple weeks of death. She lived for exactly one year from the time of
her diagnosis.
Are We Winning the War on Cancer?
In the 2010 documentary titled “Cut Poison Burn,”
filmmaker Wayne Chesler presents powerful facts about corruption in the
business of conventional cancer treatment in the United States. Consider these
seven comments that were taken from the documentary, which show that America is
far from winning the war against cancer.
“From 1920 to the present time, we have made little
progress in the treatment of adult cancers. So, a person who gets prostate
cancer or breast cancer today will live as long as a person who got it in
1920.” (Charles B. Simone, M.MS., M.D., Founder, Simone Protective Cancer
Center)
“Why are people terrified when they hear the word cancer?
Because they know it [conventional cancer treatment] doesn’t work.” (Dr. Julian
Whitaker, M.D. Founder, Whitaker Wellness Institute)
“Everyone should know that most cancer research is
largely a fraud.” (Dr. Linus Pauling 1986, Nobel Laureate)
In a patent that was designed to steal Dr. Burzynski’s
cancer cure, the United States Government, stated, “Current approaches to
combat cancer rely primarily on the use of chemical and radiation, which are
themselves carcinogenic and may promote recurrences and the development of
metastatic disease.” The US Government admits that conventional treatments
cause cancer. (Patent No. 5,605,930. “Compositions and methods for treating and
preventing pathologies including cancer.” Approved 1997 USA Department of HHS
page 56)
“The American Cancer Society is more interested in
accumulating wealth than saving lives.” (Chronicles of Philanthropy 1992)
“Breast Cancer Awareness Month was actually initiated by
the companies that make Tamoxifen. The devices for mammograms are made by
General Electric and General Electric is in a relationship with the people
behind Breast Cancer Awareness Month, so there is a huge industry that is
invested in breast cancer. Although the goal is noble, to me it is obscene that
these companies are using the symbol of the pink ribbon for commercial purposes
only. Very few dollars ever make it to really help women.” (Dr. Sherrill
Sellman, author of What Women MUST Know to Protect their Daughters from Breast
Cancer.)
“I find it very interesting that we have all these walks
for the cure for cancer. We got all the risk factors. We got all the donations.
We are going to find a cure in this decade. All this money keeps pouring in and
it all goes to the same guys. (Dr. Julian Whitaker, M.D. Founder, Whitaker
Wellness Institute)
How can this be? Where have all those billions of
research dollars gone? Where is the fruit from the war on cancer that began in
1971? Are we really much safer from the ravages of cancer today than we were in
the past?
The research dollars have all been devoured by a cancer
monopoly – a cartel – consisting of pharmaceutical companies, the American
Medical Association, a research system that supports pharmaceutical
manufacturers, a system of charities that raise money for cancer research, and
various federal agencies such as the US FDA. These groups have little interest
in curing cancer, but are fully committed to earning profits for the cancer
monopoly that is headed by the pharmaceutical companies.
Cancer is a Metabolic Disease not a Genetic Disease
There is considerable talk these days in the media and
among researchers who conduct research for the pharmaceutical industry that is
intended to convince us that the cause of cancer is genetic abnormalities.
The belief in a genetic cause for cancer serves the drug
companies very well. They want us to believe that the cure for cancer will need
to be based on genetics, and individualized drugs will need to be developed to
match each person’s genetic profile and their specific type of cancer. The vast
excitement about genetics on the part of drug companies and the conventional
medical system is based on the fact that conventional medical treatments are
unable to cure most cancers. This is a fact they will not admit.
They want us to stop asking the question, “Why has the 40
year war on cancer failed to produce any results?” They want us to stop asking
why there are only three approved treatments for cancer (surgery, radiation
therapy, and chemotherapy) and why no new cancer therapies have been approved
by the US FDA in the last one hundred years. They want us to have hope for a
brighter day in cancer treatment while our friends and family die by the
thousands every day.
Dr. Thomas N. Seyfried, Ph.D. addresses the metabolic
nature of cancer. He is a nationally known researcher in Genetics and
Biochemistry. His research program focuses on gene environmental interactions
related to complex diseases, such as epilepsy, autism, brain cancer, and
neurodegenerative diseases. Dr. Seyfried investigates many of these diseases
from the perspective of genetics, lipidomics, and energy metabolism. Much of
his work also has direct translational benefit to the clinic for the treating
of cancer through the use of the restricted ketogenic diet (KD-R). He is the
author of Cancer as a Metabolic Disease, published in 2012.
Dr. Seyfried’s research shows us that once again, the
drug companies are on the wrong track when it comes to curing cancer. The
current path of drug company research will not lead to a cure for cancer, but
will perpetuate their multibillion dollar business model, which earns profits
on the basis of withholding curative cancer treatments from the healthcare
system.
These are a few of Dr. Seyfried’s findings taken from the
conclusion to his book. [1] My comments are in brackets.
1. No real progress has been made in the management of
advanced or metastatic cancer for more than 40 years. The number of people
dying each year and each day has changed little in more than 10 years.
2. Most of the conceptual advances made in understanding
the mechanisms of cancer have more to do with nonmetastatic tumors than with
metastatic tumors. [Many cancers are discovered after they metastasize and have
already spread to other locations in the body.]
3. Most cancer, regardless of cell or tissue origin, is a
singular disease of respiratory insufficiency coupled with compensatory
fermentation. [There are not really hundreds of cancer types that need to be
studied separately. There is a common mechanism for treating all cancers.]
4. Some factors that can cause respiratory insufficiency
and cancer include age, viral infections, hypoxia, inflammation, rare inherited
mutations, radiation, and carcinogens. [A very small number of cancers have a
genetic origin. Other factors such as toxic exposure create conditions where
cancer can develop.]
5. The genomic instability seen in tumor cells is a
downstream epiphenomenon of respiratory insufficiency and enhanced
fermentation. [In other words, there are genetic abnormalities associated with
cancer, however, these are a consequence of cancer and not the cause of it.]
7. The view that most cancer is a genetic disease is no
longer credible. [This is a statement made by a researcher who began his career
as a genetic researcher.]
8. Cancer cells depend largely on glucose and glutamine
metabolism for survival, growth, and proliferation. [They must have glucose,
which is a simple sugar, in order to live.]
9. Restricted access to glucose and glutamine will
compromise cancer cell growth and survival. [When cancer cells do not have
glucose to nourish them, they die.]
10. Protection of mitochondria from oxidative damage will
prevent or reduce risk of cancer. [Antioxidants prevent cancer.]
11. Lifestyle changes will be needed to manage and
prevent cancer. [This means that there is no magic pill that we can take to
prevent or cure cancer. We must change our relationship with food and lifestyle
to prevent and cure cancer.]
12. A new era will emerge for cancer management and
prevention, once cancer becomes recognized as a metabolic disease.
In other words, the cure for cancer is obtained by
starving cancer cells so that they die while feeding the rest of the body so
that it can grow stronger and use its natural immune system to resist cancer.
This involves a high-fat low-carbohydrate restricted calorie ketogenic diet.
Dr. Seyfried looks forward to the creation of new drugs that will take
advantage of cancer’s dependency on glucose to address cancer. The combination
of diet and targeted drugs will be a low cost treatment with few if any side effects
and with a high rate of success.
The Cancer Industry in Operation
In 2012 I befriended a man in another country whose wife
was diagnosed with late stage colon cancer. By this time, my second wife and I
had spent many years studying alternative cancer protocols, and I was able to
share what I knew with the hope that it could help his wife. His wife was
resistant to trying alternative therapies unless her doctor would approve. My
friend discussed several alternative options involving herbs and dietary
supplements with the oncologist, and he was told that none of that would be
beneficial, and furthermore, it might interfere with chemotherapy.
The doctor even went one step further. He required that
they make a commitment to not use any alternative therapy unless he agreed. He
even took several bottles of supplements from their possession with the pretext
that he was going to evaluate them. He kept them for months to prevent them
from being used. They were returned only after my friend insisted that his
property be returned.
I shared information with my friend about several
alternative cancer therapies which emphasized dietary changes. I explained how
there was a large body of research that now shows that the high-fat
low-carbohydrate ketogenic diet has proven to be a powerful tool for reversing
and even curing some forms of cancer. This suggestion was met with strong
opposition from hospital nursing/dietetic staff. My friend’s wife was told that
she must eat fruit and carbohydrates in order to live. They were further told
that a person’s diet has absolutely no bearing on treating cancer. She was
encouraged to eat as much fruit, sugar, pasta, and bread as she wanted. My
friend’s wife stuck with the standard American diet as she suffered through a
dozen courses of horribly debilitating chemotherapy. Her doctor gave her
permission to try alternative cancer treatments when it was clear that she had
less than a month to live, and she would have been killed by another round of
chemo.
What I saw as I witnessed this situation was the steel
walls of a cancer factory. Once my friends opened the door to the system, no
matter what they thought or how they felt, the conveyor belt of the cancer
factory would keep on moving them forward. They dangled the prospect of
curative surgery for stage 4 metastatic colon cancer in front of her if she
would first agree to do chemotherapy. Every attempt my friends made to try to
change the treatment plan was met with opposition from her doctors to the point
where her doctors even threatened to withhold pain medication if she refused to
continue with chemotherapy. There was a standard of care and no one was allowed
to control their own treatment once they entered the factory. The only ones who
could avoid entering the cancer factory are those who had financial resources
and who could seek private treatment in Europe or Mexico.
Why is the Cancer Factory so Powerful?
Dr. Gonzalez, the developer of pancreatic enzyme therapy
for cancer gives us this answer. “War on cancer” has been a failure due to a
combination of politics, money, greed, and corruption—largely the result of an
unholy alliance between the American Cancer Society, NCI [National Cancer
Institute], Sloan-Kettering, and the drug companies.” [2]
I will discuss the various parts of the “unholy alliance”
that were used to build the cancer factory. I will describe the roles
played by pharmaceutical companies, medical doctors, medical researchers,
not-for-profit cancer charities, the FDA and CDC, carbohydrate addiction, and
medical idolatry. I will also go on to discuss what current research shows us
regarding how we can successfully cure cancer with alternative treatments. A
person with cancer does not need to step into the cancer factory and surrender
control over his or her life to the medical system. We do have other options.
However, those who wish to avoid the cancer factory need to be willing to go
through a complete lifestyle reformation.
Pharmaceutical
companies and the Cancer Factory
The cancer factory
operates on money and lots of it.
In 2014, there
will be an estimated 1,665,540 new cancer cases diagnosed and 585,720 cancer
deaths in the US. [3]
If we use a low
estimate of the average annual cost for treating each newly diagnosed person
who has cancer, (such as $50,000), [4]
then the healthcare cost will be over 83 billion dollars for this first phase
of cancer treatment for these patients in 2014.
The typical new
cancer drug coming on the market a decade ago cost about $4,500 per month (in
2012 dollars); since 2010 the median price has been around $10,000. Two of the
new cancer drugs cost more than $35,000 each per month of treatment. [5]
This makes it
clear that a large percentage of cancer treatment is directly related to the
cost of chemotherapy drugs. It is not unusual for a new cancer patient to be
given 6 to 12 months of chemotherapy as part of his or her initial treatment.
At the beginning
of the last century, one person in twenty would get cancer. In the 1940s it was
one out of every sixteen people. In the 1970s it was one person out of ten.
Today one person out of three gets cancer in the course of their life. [6]
We have lost the
war on cancer. Since the 1950s the outlook for most cancer patients has
remained the same – a one in three chance of living for 5 years after diagnosis
using conventional therapies – surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy drugs. The
fact is that today two out of three cancer patients will be dead before 5
years. [7]
In 1985,
Professor John Cairns from Harvard University published a study in Scientific
American concerning the benefits of chemotherapy drugs. He stated, “Aside from
certain rare cancers, it is not possible to detect any sudden changes in the
death rates for any of the major cancers that could be credited to
chemotherapy. Whether any of the common cancers can be cured by chemotherapy
has yet to be established.” He also stated, “A six- or twelve-month course of
chemotherapy not only is a very unpleasant experience but also has its own
intrinsic mortality…treatments now avert…perhaps 2 or 3 percent…of the deaths
from cancer that occur each year in the U.S.” [8]
Nineteen years
later, in 2004, Australian researchers came to the same conclusion as Dr.
Cairns. They found that the overall contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to
5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the
USA. [9] In other words, very little benefit is being obtained from the
billions of dollars that are spent on chemotherapy drugs.
The
pharmaceutical industry has a powerful hold on the entire medical system in the
United States, and they are not about to let alternative cancer therapies be established.
How do they control the cancer factory and the doctors that provide cancer
treatment? The next sections will examine other parts of the cartel. For
additional information about pharmaceutical companies, please read the
following articles.
Physicians and the
Cancer Factory
In the 1800s there were two primary approaches to
healing. The allopathic model viewed disease as an invader, which needed to be
driven out of the body through the use of various treatments, which included
bleeding, administration of toxic substances such as mercury and lead, and the
use of surgical procedures. The other common style was the Empiric medical
model, which attempted to help a person overcome disease by strengthening and
encouraging a person’s own ability to heal. Herbs and highly diluted substances
were given to help establish normal functioning of the body.
In the early twentieth century everything began to
change. Certain wealthy families with the last names of Carnegie, Morgan, and
Rockefeller took notice of the potential profits that could be made from new
patented medicines. They joined forces with the American Medical Association,
which represented allopathic physicians, and implemented a plan to take control
of the healthcare system in America.
(Researcher’s note: SEE THE 1982 NORMAN DODD INTERVIEW
BELOW)
They began by taking control over medical schools. They
made large donations to medical schools around the country in exchange for the opportunity
to put their representatives on university boards of directors. This enabled
them to reshape the curriculum to focus on what would become the three pillars
of modern medicine, i.e. surgery, radiotherapy, and synthetic pharmaceutical
drugs. Medical training would now focus on these pillars, especially the last
pillar – synthetic drugs. Doctors would be taught to depend on pharmaceutical
drugs for their first line treatment for all health conditions.
It only took about twenty years for the American Medical
Association to dominate medical practice in the United States. During this
time, they implemented a campaign to eliminate all competition. They used
various marketing campaigns to discredit and disqualify homeopathic physicians
from practicing medicine in the United States. The AMA called other types of
healthcare providers quacks and called all therapies, other than the ones they
provided, quackery. This smear campaign continues to this very day with
numerous anti-competition websites. The chief website is called Quack Watch,
which is dedicated to eliminating all forms of competition to the
pharmaceutical cartel, which might threaten the use of pharmaceutical drugs and
which might cause people to turn away from the allopathic medical care system and
its cancer factory.
For additional information about how doctors are
controlled by the pharmaceutical cartel, please read these articles:
Medical Research and the Cancer Factory
Before 1980 most clinical research was funded by the US
National Institutes of Health through grants given to universities. The
universities conducted unbiased scientific research designed to reveal truth
about whatever they were studying.
During the 1990s, most of those research dollars were
diverted from universities and were brought into for-profit research
organizations that exist to serve the pharmaceutical industry. This change gave
drug companies much greater control over the research process. They could now
design their own studies. They could control the data distribution and could
hide unfavorable research results. They also began to exercise considerable
control over research publications, which means that they could prevent
research papers on alternative medical therapies from being published. [10]
Government Oversight
and the Cancer Machine
The pharmaceutical industry wants us to believe that the
US Food and Drug Agency (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) are
working to provide safe and effective medical care for all Americans. The truth
is that the FDA is now funded, in large part, by fees paid by drug companies,
and the CDC marches to the drum beat of the pharmaceutical industry.
There is a revolving door of pharmaceutical industry
representatives who hold influential positions in these agencies while having
strong ties to their former (and future) pharmaceutical industry employers. In
short, the big pharma fox is not only guarding the hen house, he is living in
the henhouse. Thus, the principle of overseeing public safety and efficacy has
been replaced by the profit motivation of the pharmaceutical industry. These
agencies not only serve the cartel and its cancer factory, but they are working
hard to prevent anyone who is not part of the cartel from successfully
introducing alternative cancer treatments into the medical care system.
Please read the following articles for additional
information:
Charitable Fundraising and the Cancer Factory
I used to give money to all the walks, runs, dance
marathons, swimathons, bikeathons, etc. I used to believe that I was doing a
good deed. I saw all those handicapped kids and women who were suffering from
breast cancer and other life threatening diseases, and my heart strings would
get twanged. With the sympathetic sounds of pleading children in my ears, I
would open my wallet and support what I believed must be a good cause.
What I have learned over the years is that most of these
types of activities and the national organizations that organize them have a
strong interest in not curing the diseases that are listed in their names. In
the case of cancer charities, they are among the most highly funded charities.
Beyond the high percentage of the money they use for overhead operations, most
of the money they raise goes to support research activities that have been
approved by the pharmaceutical cartel. In other words, when we give a dollar to
a cancer charity, it will likely end up supporting research that was designed
by the pharmaceutical industry. It will not be given to anyone who is doing
alternative research on cancer treatments, which might be a financial
competition to the drugs, radiation, and surgery that are provided by the
cancer factory.
In short, a dollar given to these charities enables the
drug cartel to continue with their existing research program on donated money.
I may as well have just written a check to Pfizer, Bayer, or some other
multi-national pharmaceutical corporation.
For additional information, please read the following
article:
Carbohydrate Addiction and the Cancer Factory
I have found over the years of speaking with people about
dietary approaches to disease management, that most people don’t want to hear
the message. We know that the progression of many diseases can be halted,
reversed, and even cured by the use of a ketogenic diet without the use of
pharmaceutical drugs. This is true for epilepsy, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, heart
disease, and cancer. When the ketogenic dietary option is mentioned, people
initially have a positive response, but when the details are described, then
their enthusiasm quickly vanishes. People say, “What would I eat if I have to
give up sugar, bread, pasta, potatoes, cookies, cakes, fruit, soda, sweet
vegetables, and snack foods that I eat?” They can’t imagine eating a high fat,
medium protein, low carbohydrate diet. Most people simply say something like,
“Well, that’s interesting, but my oncologist says I can eat whatever I want…”
Or, “Well, why would I want to do that, I have pills that control my
condition.”
The truth is that most Americans are physically and emotionally
addicted to carbohydrates. Most carbohydrates turn into glucose and as research
shows, most cancers require glucose to survive. Healthy human cells can either
use glucose or ketone bodies for energy. However, cancer cells have impaired
respiration, which results in their inability to use ketones for energy. The
principle behind the ketogenic diet for cancer treatment is to severely reduce
glucose consumption and calorie consumption, to force the body to produce
ketone bodies which it can use as an energy source. The result of this dietary
therapy is to essentially starve cancer cells, while all other healthy cells in
the body are nourished by ketone bodies.
Unfortunately most members of the conventional healthcare
system falsely believe that glucose is necessary to support human life. Every
cell in the human body can easily survive on ketone bodies including the human
brain, but not cancer cells.
One of the foremost experts in the use of the ketogenic
diet for treating cancer is Dr. Thomas N. Seyfried, Ph.D. I started this
article with a few of his research findings. He is the author of Cancer as a
Metabolic Disease, published in 2012.
Dr. Seyfried writes:
Evidence suggests that the human brain can become
addicted to glucose from a lifelong consumption of energy-dense foods of low
nutritional value. [Typical high carbohydrate American diet] Consequently, the
abrupt cessation of food intake may produce temporary withdrawal symptoms
similar to those experienced from cessation of any addictive substance. This is
one reason why considerable personal discipline and motivation is needed to
follow the ketogenic diet regimen.
Glucose withdrawal symptoms can be greater in those
individuals who have never fasted than in individuals who have experience
fasting. As most people in modern industrial societies do not practice
therapeutic fasting as a lifestyle, glucose withdrawal symptoms will likely be
encountered in most patients who attempt the restricted ketogenic diet as a
cancer therapy. These symptoms could also be greater in older individuals than
in younger ones. Indeed, fasting might not be possible in some older people who
have lived a food-rich life of excess.
When compared to the debilitating effects of conventional
chemotherapies and radiation, however, the symptoms associated with the
ketogenic diet are relatively mild and will pass after 2-3 days for most
people. Nevertheless, glucose withdrawal symptoms and the feeling of hunger are
simply too uncomfortable for some people regardless of the potential therapeutic
benefits. It is therefore important for physicians to recognize that some
cancer patients might be unable or unwilling to implement the restricted
ketogenic diet for various reasons. Some individuals are simply incapable of
fasting. Hence, the standard of care [surgery, radiation, chemotherapy] becomes
the only therapeutic option for these patients. [11]
I mention Dr. Seyfried’s work, because most people have
been victimized by the high-carbohydrate diet, which has now been proven to
cause diabetes, heart disease, Alzheimer’s, and cancer. We were told that
saturated fat and cholesterol were evil, and we should eat mostly carbohydrate
food with every meal and to especially start the day with a fat free breakfast
consisting of nearly 100% sugar and grains. The standard American diet has
created generations of carbohydrate addicts.
When an addict is faced with the prospect of needing to
give up his addiction many will say, “I would rather die than to give up candy
bars, bread, pasta, and fruit.” And sadly, I have watched people with cancer do
just that! They gave their cancer the exact food it wanted to keep growing and
they died despite all the chemo, radiation, and surgery. They refused to accept
the possibility that their nutritionally deficient standard American diet had
anything to do with their health.
For additional information about the ketogenic diet,
please visit the following:
Excerpt:
“Question: Do your doctors have an opinion on your diet
therapy?
No. I’ve told all of my doctors, my oncologist, my
neurosurgeon, my neurologist, about my diet. I did not ask for their help in
adopting it, I just began slowly and felt I had enough good information to take
it on myself. I was also not undergoing any other treatment at the time.”
Medical Idolatry and the Cancer Factory
We have all been taught to put people who wear white
coats up on very high pedestals. We have been taught to believe that physicians
and other healthcare providers will always keep our best interests in mind. We
have been conditioned to live as if doctors are the closest people to God that
we can see on the Earth. We are to revere them, respect them, and never
question their judgments. We should feel shame if we doubt our doctors and
should consider ourselves traitors if we don’t follow every directive they
give. From our earliest years, we have been brainwashed to do whatever doctors
tell us. What do we tell our children when they are sick and are refusing to
take a horrid tasting medicine? We say, “You have to take this, because your
doctor says so.” In short, we treat them like gods and worship them through our
checkbooks.
To walk away from the cancer factory requires us to break
the oath of allegiance that we have made to the pharmaceutical industry and the
American medical system. The oath may never have been written down for our
consideration and assent; nevertheless, most Americans live by it. It goes like
this:
I affirm that I will obey my doctors. I will take all
the medication that he or she prescribes. I will trust my doctor, because he or
she would never do anything that would not be in my best interest. I will
distrust all forms of alternative therapies and will especially distrust all
healthcare providers except those approved by my doctor. I yield responsibility
over my life and my health to my doctor and to the therapies of the
conventional American medical system. I will entrust them with my health and
give them credit for all successes. If I cannot be cured, then I will attribute
the failure to genetics, and will reassure my doctor that he or she provided the
best care that could be offered for my condition. I will praise the
conventional medical system in America until I die.
When we renounce this oath, we become responsible for
managing our own healthcare. We turn away from medical idolatry and no longer
worship the people who wear white coats. We discontinue the blind acceptance of
whatever healthcare providers tell us to do, and we actively begin to chart the
course for our health. We may choose to seek out alternative minded
physicians who will work with us as medical consultants, which is a very
different type of relationship. Some who read this will still be reluctant to
break the oath, because they are not willing to kick out the pedestal that
their doctors are standing on. I hope, as you read further, you will begin
having a change of mind.
The Failure of the Cancer Factory
The following links are for articles that describe how
the pharmaceutical cartel and its supporting institutions are making us sick
and have failed to promote our health. The failures are many and the conflicts
of interest are grievous.
Conclusion
The big pharma cartel has bought its way into every
corner of US society. Our medical freedom is dwindling by the day. Many of us
have made decisions to try to avoid interacting with the healthcare system and
the pharmaceutical masters who control most doctors in America whenever
possible. It is possible to take responsibility for your health and to reverse
the patterns of disease that you are experiencing. Yes, this includes cancer.
Please remember, illness is not normal despite what doctors tell you!
I spent nearly 50 years eating the standard American
diet. I was extremely overweight, sick, and developing heart disease. I have
been on the ketogenic diet for most of the last three years, and used a less restrictive
version of it for a few years before that. My heart function is now normal and
I am more mentally alert and physically stronger than I have been in many
years.
I have been focusing on the ketogenic diet in this
article, but there are numerous other approaches to curing cancer. You will not
learn about them from conventional physicians who are working in the cancer
factory. In part two of this article, I will review many of the highly
successful alternative treatments that are being used for cancer treatment.
There are many great options for those who want to avoid being poisoned,
burned, and cut by the practitioners who work in the modern American cancer
factory.
Consider the profits that are being made by chemotherapy
drugs. This is actually a tiny portion of all the money that is being made by
the cancer factory and the pharmaceutical cartel.
Pfizer alone projects its annual cancer drug returns will
be $11 billion by 2018. [12]
In 2010, Gleevec grossed $4.3 billion. Roche’s Herceptin
(the HER2 drug) and Avastin did even better: $6 billion and $7.4 billion
respectively. Cancer plays a huge role in the rising costs of healthcare.
America’s National Institutes of Health predict that spending on all cancer
treatment will rise from $125 billion last year to at least $158 billion in
2020. If drugs become pricier, as seems likely, that bill could rise to $207
billion. [13]
The cancer factory is truly big business in America. This
system cannot afford to permit anyone to find a cure for cancer. If any of the
low cost highly successful alternative cancer treatments were to be approved
for use, then this entire system would come crashing down. The pharmaceutical
cartel will not let that happen.
To learn more about the alternative cancer therapies
please see:
References
[1] Cancer as a Metabolic Disease, Thomas N. Seyfried,
2012, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken NJ, page 407.
[2] “A Natural, Nutrition-Based Breakthrough Treatment
for Pancreatic Cancer?” The Alliance for Natural Health USA, August 28, 2012,
Retrieved 8/13/14. http://www.anh-usa.org/a-nutrition-treatment-for-pancreatic-cancer/
[3] Cancer Facts & Figures 2014, American Cancer
Society.
[4] “Cancer the forbidden cures,” Film documentary. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAMYAoiCSsI
[5] “A Hospital Says ‘No’ To An $11,000-A-Month Cancer
Drug,” Peter B. Bach, Leonard B. Saltz And Robert E. Wittes; NYTimes.com,
10/14/2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/15/opinion/a-hospital-says-no-to-an-11000-a-month-cancer-drug.html?_r=0
[6] “Cancer the forbidden cures,” Film documentary.
[7] IBID.
[8] “Chemotherapy,” alternative cancer treatments and suppression,
Retrieved 8/12/2014. http://www.cancerinform.org/chemotherapy.html
[9] Organ G1, Ward R, Barton M.; “The contribution of
cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies,” Clin Oncol (R
Coll Radiol). 2004 Dec, PMID: 15630849.
[10] “Cancer the forbidden cures,” Film documentary.
[11] Cancer as a Metabolic Disease, Thomas N. Seyfried,
2012, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken NJ, page 361.
[12] “The Simple Cancer Cure that has been known for
quite a while now,” Health Impact News. http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/the-simple-cancer-cure-that-has-been-known-for-quite-a-while-now/
[13] “Drug companies in America: The costly war on
cancer,” The Economist 5/26/2011. http://www.economist.com/node/18743951
Ed Griffin interview with Norman Dodd in
1982
We are now at the year 1908, which was the year that the Carnegie
Foundation began operations. In that year, the trustees, meeting for the first
time, raised a specific question, which they discussed throughout the balance
of the year in a very learned fashion. The question is: “Is there any means known
more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire
people?” And they conclude that no more effective means than war to that end is
known to humanity.
No comments:
Post a Comment