If you still trust
your doctor to know
everything about treating cancer
Synopsis: This paper is a
discussion of the methods used by drug manufacturers and their influence
and control of conventional medicine. They have a "strangle
hold" on the system by exercising strong influence or control over
medical schools, individual doctors, the media, and government. This
"for profit" control shuts the patient out from the
inexpensive and effective alternative treatment of disease. Doctors, for
the most part, are victims too. They do their best according to their
restricted training and licensing limitations. This results in cancer
patients being robbed of their viable and effective options, their
needless suffering under the "barbaric" treatment of
conventional cancer treatment. "Barbaric" is the term often
used by conventional medical practice to describe the treatment
provided by them and the hope for better treatment protocols within the
next 10 years. This paper is a compilation from several published
sources.
If you are being treated for cancer and you still
trust your doctor to know what is best for you. you owe it to yourself
to understand the following report. If you are influenced by the opinion
of family and friends, with comments such as, "why not do
both", or "Trust your doctor and if it doesn't work out, then
try alternative medicine", you need to understand this report.
Conventional medical practice has surgery,
devastating chemicals, and the destruction of body tissue by radiation
as their main tools for treating cancer. If you have recurrent cancer,
there is no effective conventional treatment to provide remission. The
only hope they offer is to slow the progress of the cancer and to make
the patient comfortable.
Alternative cancer treatment, which is very
effective for most cancer patients, And usually does no damage to the
body while often showing immediate results, and often resulting in full
remission in a few months to a few weeks. Some alternative treatments do
go better with careful supervision, but there are many effective,
inexpensive and safe protocols. My very extensive cancer was 95% gone in
10 days. A friend was cancer free in three weeks. I routinely see people
in full remission it two months, though some may take a year or more.
There are some unfortunate people for whom nothing works. Dr.
Christopher said that it seems that some people are destined to die. but
it is my opinion and experience that 80% or more of cancer patients can
achieve remission if they diligently follow a good alternative treatment
plan.
If you have a weak understanding of the
differences between conventional and alternative cancer treatment, you
are likely to fall prey to the many pitfalls on the way. Your resolve
may be weakened and you may be influenced by advice from family and
friends who don't understand the problem. I will describe the situation
in modern conventional health care. This is not just my opinion. This is
a report compiled from many published sources, some of which will be
referenced.
Business people are engaged "for
profit". Expensively trained professionals such as doctors and
attorneys expect to pay back their student loans, and earn a good
living. Manufacturers strive to enhance their earnings and market share.
One way this is accomplished is by confronting their competition by
whatever means at their disposal. Exaggerated claims are common as well
as bashing their competition.
It is unfortunate that this also extends into the
medical services. Drug manufacturers use every leverage, including
lobbying the government, suppressing their competition, and promotion
their products to the users, using illegal but un enforceable tactics.
This is still good old American free enterprise.
The drug manufacturers direct financial inducement
of doctors is restricted to educational materials only and with an
annual dollar limit of $200 per doctor. The system admits that this
restriction is out of control with drug manufacturers spending thousands
of dollars every year on every doctor and on such non educational
material as expensive dinners, and vacation trips. Drug manufacturers
are not foolish in their investment. They expect and get great returns
for their investment dollars. Not only do they coerce doctors but they
virtually own the medical schools through endowments. The people in the
system defend this practice by saying; "doctors are not influenced,
they are smarter than that"! Would you believe that the
companies invest these large sums of money for some reason other than a
return on their investment? The people who are in the system would
logically be inclined to support the system, it "works" for
all involved.
Below is a portion of a news letter that I
received from Dr. Ron Kennedy M.D. on 7-19-02 "If you examine
traditional medicine as in the practice methods of the person widely
considered to be the best clinician who ever lived, Sir William Osler
(who died in 1919), his methods were very similar to what is now called
"alternative medicine" (not alternatives to medicine - which
includes a lot of baloney, but alternative medicine). Since 1919 the
pharmaceutical industry has literally purchased and now owns mainstream
medicine lock, stock, and barrel. "Please go to the site below for
additional input.
This abuse has resulted in a "good old
boys" organization where the insiders mutually support each other
and the outsiders are shut out. In this case, the "outsiders"
are the alternative medicine providers and patients.
What is the competition that the drug
manufacturers face? - very effective and non patentable products such as
some herbs and other products that are not owned by the inside group.
How about the FDA, don't they test herbs and such?
The short answer is "no." One reason is that the rigorous and
extensive testing of a material under strict guidelines is very
expensive. There are various estimates, but the latest that I heard is
13 million dollars to test and approve a drug. Nobody would put that
amount of money in testing an herb that was in the public domain.
Instead, if it were an effective treatment, good business would dictate
that it be eliminated from competition by whatever means, including
lies, lawsuits over various allegations, and government cooperation by
conducting raids and confiscation . For instance, consider Dr. Byrzinski
and his "antineoplaston" treatment of cancer. The FDA has
brought several suits against him and he has successfully defended every
one. Immediately, the FDA brought another suit. They are using tax
payer's money, so they can do that. This has all the earmarks of a
harassment campaign against him, wouldn't you say? And, they are using
tax payer's money to do it.
A medical doctor pointed out to me that In some
cases it would be illegal, immoral, and un ethical to test these
products under the standard extensive double blind protocols. It may
have been for this reason that a regional official of the FDA told the
owner of Cantron, which is an effective cancer treatment, "I don't
care if it cures every cancer in the country, it will never be approved.
Another reason for not testing a protocol is that
it can't be done. How can a double blind study be conducted on the
effect of dietary changes and not have the doctor or the patient know if
the patient were eating real food or a placebo? Practically speaking,
many products and protocols are approved without double blind testing as
is required. One such treatment is the popular and profitable coronary
bypass operations. Another is in the use of aspirin.
Between the control of our medical schools through
endowments and the legal requirements for materials to be approved, the
alternative community is shut out from open public access and support.
The media is prevented from favorable reports of alternative treatments
because of the tremendous clout held by drug manufacturing advertising
dollars. One prestigious medical journal ran such a story and was
immediately informed that if they "did it again", the
advertising would be pulled. This is very good "business". It
is also very poor public service.
I heard Dr. Adkins, of "The Adkins Diet"
fame, as he spoke on a talk show several years ago. He suggested that
the restriction of "tested and approved" could be circumvented
by evidence that it works. This is especially true of the harmless
materials such as many herbs and the programs that offer dietary changes
to effect treatment.
I recently saw on television, a discussion of the
testing of chicken cartilage for cancer treatment as shark cartilage is
being touted. One speaker said, "We don't know the long term
effect of this drug!" I couldn't believe that he was
serious, people have been chewing on chicken bones "forever"!
It is plain to see that one driving force is emotional. It is natural to
respond emotionally when your livelihood, politics, philosophy or
integrity is threatened.
Scare tactics are used for their emotional impact
on the judgment of the laity. Stories of contaminated products, outright
fraud, malpractice and exaggerated claims are rampant. This is not
a judgment of the treatment, but of the people involved.
Following are some items from the evening news
during July and August 2002; More people die of misprescribed drugs
that die of suicide.
One out of four people who die in intensive care
units were given a wrong diagnosis.
The big news of 7-17-02; Hospital infections are
the 4th leading cause of death in the U. S.
The 6th leading cause of death in the US is
malpractice of doctors such as being too busy to wash hands between
patients.
One in four hospital deaths are due to poor
nursing such as not being observant of the patients condition. This is
not to find fault with the system. This is an attribute of human nature.
We have the best health crisis management that there ever was. Just be
aware of emotional claims against alternative medicine. Reports of
contaminated herbal products are not a judgment against the herb, but
against the nature of people.
The "60 minutes 2" program on February
19th, 2003 reported the distribution of a prescription drug through the
mail to patients who were using a competitor's brand or a generic brand.
The report showed the violation of privacy of patient information by
compromising the doctor's staff to obtain confidential records, the
danger of the use of the drug to some of the patients who received it,
and the fraud involved in sending bogus letters from the patient's
doctors on stolen and reproduced letterheads and bogus prescription
changes. This is, of course, not the doctor's fault.
You may owe it to yourself to be informed of the
allegations against alternative medicine and have a good understanding
of a rebuttal to them if you wish to pursue an active alternative
program against the opinion of conventional medicine as expressed by
doctors and acquaintances and have the strength to stand by your
position. You may visit "Quackwatch". You may search for it on
the internet. This is an extreme arm of conventional medicine that uses
inflammatory and derisive language in their attempts to dissuade
patients from considering alternative treatments.
Dr. Loraine Day was head of a department in
a large hospital for many years. On her website at;
http://drday.com/
she offers much information on this subject. In her video tape,
"Cancer Doesn't Scare Me Anymore", she describes how she
refused to be taken to a conventional hospital for cancer treatment
because she knew what treatment she would receive. She overcame her very
aggressive cancer by following alternative protocols instead.
One supplier of a harmless and very
beneficial natural product was told that his application for FDA
approval was denied and if he ever tried to get it approved again,
"We will bury you so deep that you will never see the light of
day." Such is the determination of the powers that be and the
obstacle presented to Alternative medicine.
Against all of this, the government has
instituted, by act of congress, the OAM, (Office of Alternative
Medicine) which is supposed to promote alternative medicine to public
use. This came about in Congress following the many testimonies of
Congressmen regarding their own personal successes with alternative
medical treatment. However, this agency hasn't done much to promote
alternative medicine because the ones who operate it are in the
"enemy camp" being made up of conventional doctors and others
of the "in group" community.
My oncologist told me in December of 2001
that he could not practice what I advocate because he would lose his
license. He is allowed to perform only those things that are approved by
the FDA.
Alaska has made it legal for a
conventional doctor to assist a patient in using alternative medical
treatments. The AIDS epidemic has brought about the benefit of legal
ownership of a supply of un approved drugs such as Laetrile (vitamin
B-17). Other effective herbs are un regulated and may be bought at
health food stores. However, there can be no claims made for the
treatment of any disease. The are labeled the ubiquitous, "dietary
supplement". The purchaser has to know the benefits from other
sources. I spoke the American office of Flor-Essence, which is an Essiac
product for treating cancer. I said something about "cancer"
and the lady on the other end of the telephone said that she was not
allowed to say that "word".
It is against this system that
alternative medicine labors. There are many people doing good work. They
are disassociated with no organizational structure to enable sharing
information and peer review. Many supporters of alternative cancer
treatment, do so at their own expense and at no cost to the patient. I
am privileged to be in their number.
There is much more that can be said on
the subject. I hope that this is enough to convince you that alternative
medicine offers the only reasonable hope for a continuing cancer free
life, and that you find the determination, courage and strength to seek
out and apply these healing arts to your own life and the lives of those
you love.
Mr. Christopher Adams, Staff reporter for
The Wall Street Journal, wrote an article on June 24th, 2002 and
published by Yahoo Groups, entitled, "Student Doctors Rebel Against
Drug Maker's Influence."
In this article he describes the actions
of a student, Jaya Agrawal against the pervasive attempts of drug
manufacturers to dominate medical schools by providing free lunches at
seminars and giving pens, lab coats, calculators, clocks and other items
containing company logos. She said "We need to find some way to
reclaim the moral high ground". Ms. Agarwal is leading a nationwide
revolt among medical students against this attempt to buy the loyalty of
future doctors by these overt practices.
Drug companies say that they will
continue to market to residents and students as long as teaching
hospitals continue to let them do so.
To quote a slogan from a recent national
election, "It's the economy, stupid!".
For more information, you
can get instant access to the Cancer Treatment Books below. And
while they are not free, the authors have done extensive research and
some have had experience with thousands of cancer patients!
During
the past 100 years, medical practice has been conformed to the restraints
brought about by legal intervention to exclude many former practices and to
limit therapies to those that conform to the standards of the FDA and other
agencies. Prior to this time, many alternative protocols were openly
available. Some of these treatments are highly effective but are illegal to
prescribe because they don't conform to the current legal requirements.
It is therefore necessary for this site to limit its offering to information
only. We are not allowed to prescribe, so all decisions and outcomes are the
responsibility of the patient. If you have any doubts as to the validity of
this information, it is your responsibility to make your own choice and to
be responsible for the outcome of following your choices.