Fine, go there, but I believe they will just kill you. Hear what cancer expert Samuel Epstein says:
What has been happening to our ability to treat and cure cancers over all this time? In the 1960’s, there was about a 49 percent five-year survival rate. Forty-nine percent of people survived five years after diagnosis in the 1960’s, when virtually no money was being spent in these areas. Now, after billions of dollars have been poured into cancer treatment, the length of survival is about six years. It has barely increased over the last forty years for the great majority of common cancers in the overall population. …
How does all this square up with what we are constantly hearing about these miracle cancer drugs? The answer lies in a deceptive statistical ploy. The efficacy of cancer drugs is determined on the basis of what we call tumor response. If a patient with cancer takes a drug and at the end of six months the tumor has shrunk in size, that’s a tumor response. That’s supposedly fine. We’re doing very well indeed. Let’s go out and market this miracle drug. Let’s go out and make millions and billions out of it. However, if you follow up with these patients who have had a tumor response at six months after diagnosis and treatment, in twelve to eighteen months you generally find that the original tumor has recurred and often grown larger. Sometimes, the treated patient will die sooner than the untreated patient—and this is quite apart from the fact that the treated patient’s quality of life is often devastated by highly toxic chemotherapy and radiation. [And by the costs of treatment].
AND
For the majority of cancer chemotherapeutic agents, there is questionable evidence of efficacy. There are some relatively rare cancers for which there is strong evidence of efficacy; for childhood cancer, where treatment is successful, the incidence of long-term recurrences are very high. Delayed toxic complications such as neurological, behavioral, and reproductive problems are also common, and the incidence of secondary cancers caused by the treatment itself is very high.
Dr. Samuel Epstein is a professor of occupational and environmental medicine at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He began his career as a laboratory chief documenting the metabolic origins of cancer, impeccably documenting the direct effects of industrial chemicals as causes of Cancer. He wrote the original proposal for what became the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976. During the Regan era, he was on a White House hit list and efforts were made to keep him off any government committees studying cancer prevention. An actual smoking gun memo reads “Get him out. Horrible.” In 1998 he was honored with the Right Livelihood Award, known as the “alternative Nobel Prize.” He has written innumerable scientific articles and several compelling books, including “The Politics of Cancer” and “The Safe Shopper’s Bible.” He is the chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, a global network of scientists, public servants, and activists.
And there is more if you just search the page for his name at http://naturefinder.net/ProvocativeQuotes.html or read the book "Ecological Medicine" by Kenny Asubel.
Then there is an interview with Jerry Brunetti, who cured himself of lymphoma through nutrition, talking about his cancer experience at http://naturefinder.net/interview-brunetti_may02.pdf
(Note: Comments not relevant to post removed by EmpowHer moderator.)
Comment Reply
Fine, go there, but I believe they will just kill you. Hear what cancer expert Samuel Epstein says:
What has been happening to our ability to treat and cure cancers over all this time? In the 1960’s, there was about a 49 percent five-year survival rate. Forty-nine percent of people survived five years after diagnosis in the 1960’s, when virtually no money was being spent in these areas. Now, after billions of dollars have been poured into cancer treatment, the length of survival is about six years. It has barely increased over the last forty years for the great majority of common cancers in the overall population. …
How does all this square up with what we are constantly hearing about these miracle cancer drugs? The answer lies in a deceptive statistical ploy. The efficacy of cancer drugs is determined on the basis of what we call tumor response. If a patient with cancer takes a drug and at the end of six months the tumor has shrunk in size, that’s a tumor response. That’s supposedly fine. We’re doing very well indeed. Let’s go out and market this miracle drug. Let’s go out and make millions and billions out of it. However, if you follow up with these patients who have had a tumor response at six months after diagnosis and treatment, in twelve to eighteen months you generally find that the original tumor has recurred and often grown larger. Sometimes, the treated patient will die sooner than the untreated patient—and this is quite apart from the fact that the treated patient’s quality of life is often devastated by highly toxic chemotherapy and radiation. [And by the costs of treatment].
AND
For the majority of cancer chemotherapeutic agents, there is questionable evidence of efficacy. There are some relatively rare cancers for which there is strong evidence of efficacy; for childhood cancer, where treatment is successful, the incidence of long-term recurrences are very high. Delayed toxic complications such as neurological, behavioral, and reproductive problems are also common, and the incidence of secondary cancers caused by the treatment itself is very high.
Dr. Samuel Epstein is a professor of occupational and environmental medicine at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He began his career as a laboratory chief documenting the metabolic origins of cancer, impeccably documenting the direct effects of industrial chemicals as causes of Cancer. He wrote the original proposal for what became the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976. During the Regan era, he was on a White House hit list and efforts were made to keep him off any government committees studying cancer prevention. An actual smoking gun memo reads “Get him out. Horrible.” In 1998 he was honored with the Right Livelihood Award, known as the “alternative Nobel Prize.” He has written innumerable scientific articles and several compelling books, including “The Politics of Cancer” and “The Safe Shopper’s Bible.” He is the chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, a global network of scientists, public servants, and activists.
And there is more if you just search the page for his name at http://naturefinder.net/ProvocativeQuotes.html or read the book "Ecological Medicine" by Kenny Asubel.
Then there is an interview with Jerry Brunetti, who cured himself of lymphoma through nutrition, talking about his cancer experience at http://naturefinder.net/interview-brunetti_may02.pdf
(Note: Comments not relevant to post removed by EmpowHer moderator.)
January 23, 2010 - 8:03pmThis Comment
Reply