Since this post has generated a lot of comments and traffic, I’m adding a solution to the post rather than just posting about the problem. For information on natural solutions to cancer please visit Dr. Lorraine Day’s website and be sure to read the information on her Questions and Anwers page. Dr. Day cured herself of cancer using natural therapies and she is a medical professional. Also see my post on Questioning Chemotherapy.
From Cancer Therapy:
The great lack of trust is evident even amongst doctors. Polls and questionnaires show that three doctors out of four (75 per cent) would refuse any chemotherapy because of its ineffectiveness against the disease and its devastating effects on the entire human organism.
This is what many doctors and scientists have to say about chemotherapy:“The majority of the cancer patients in this country die because of chemotherapy, which does not cure breast, colon or lung cancer. This has been documented for over a decade and nevertheless doctors still utilize chemotherapy to fight these tumors.” (Allen Levin, MD, UCSF, “The Healing of Cancer”, Marcus Books, 1990).
“If I were to contract cancer, I would never turn to a certain standard for the therapy of this disease. Cancer patients who stay away from these centers have some chance to make it.” (Prof. Gorge Mathe, “Scientific Medicine Stymied”, Medicines Nouvelles, Paris, 1989)
“Dr. Hardin Jones, lecturer at the University of California, after having analyzed for many decades statistics on cancer survival, has come to this conclusion: ‘… when not treated, the patients do not get worse or they even get better’. The unsettling conclusions of Dr. Jones have never been refuted”. (Walter Last, “The Ecologist”, Vol. 28, no. 2, March-April 1998)
“Many oncologists recommend chemotherapy for almost any type of cancer, with a faith that is unshaken by the almost constant failures”.(Albert Braverman, MD, “Medical Oncology in the 90s”, Lancet, 1991, Vol. 337, p. 901)
“Our most efficacious regimens are loaded with risks, side effects and practical problems; and after all the patients we have treated have paid the toll, only a miniscule percentage of them is paid off with an ephemeral period of tumoral regression and generally a partial one” (Edward G. Griffin “World Without Cancer”, American Media Publications, 1996)
“After all, and for the overwhelming majority of the cases, there is no proof whatsoever that chemotherapy prolongs survival expectations. And this is the great lie about this therapy, that there is a correlation between the reduction of cancer and the extension of the life of the patient”. (Philip Day, “Cancer: Why we’re still dying to know the truth”, Credence Publications, 2000)
“Several full-time scientists at the McGill Cancer Center sent to 118 doctors, all experts on lung cancer, a questionnaire to determine the level of trust they had in the therapies they were applying; they were asked to imagine that they themselves had contracted the disease and which of the six current experimental therapies they would choose. 79 doctors answered, 64 of them said that they would not consent to undergo any treatment containing cis-platinum – one of the common chemotherapy drugs they used – while 58 out of 79 believed that all the experimental therapies above were not accepted because of the ineffectiveness and the elevated level of toxicity of chemotherapy.” (Philip Day, “Cancer: Why we’re still dying to know the truth”, Credence Publications, 2000)
“Doctor Ulrich Able, a German epidemiologist of the Heidelberg Mannheim Tumor Clinic, has exhaustively analyzed and reviewed all the main studies and clinical experiments ever performed on chemotherapy …. Able discovered that the comprehensive world rate of positive outcomes because of chemotherapy was frightening, because, simply, nowhere was scientific evidence available demonstrating that chemotherapy is able to ‘prolong in any appreciable way the life of patients affected by the most common type of organ cancer.’
Able highlights that rarely can chemotherapy improve the quality of life, and he describes it as a scientific squalor while maintaining that at least 80 per cent of chemotherapy administered in the world is worthless. Even if there is no scientific proof whatsoever that chemotherapy works, neither doctors nor patients are prepared to give it up (Lancet, Aug. 10, 1991). None of the main media has ever mentioned this exhaustive study: it has been completely buried” (Tim O’Shea, “Chemotherapy – An Unproven Procedure”)
“According to medical associations, the notorious and dangerous side effects of drugs have become the fourth main cause of death after infarction, cancer, and apoplexy” ( Journal of the American Medical Association, April 15, 1998)
From Cancer Inform:
“Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy.”
-Dr. Alan Levin
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 400,000 deaths from cancer that occur each year in the U.S.”
– Prof John Cairns
Scientific American, 1985
Do We Need a New Approach to Cancer?
In 1971, President Richard Nixon announced the War on Cancer and promised a cure by the 1977 bicentennial. In each of the 25 years since, more Americans have died of cancer than the year before.
Even the established oncology community has realized that chemotherapy does not effectively treat cancer. Expert epidemiologist John C. Bailar III, MD, PhD, Chairman of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at McGill University, wrote on the unrelenting rise in cancer fatalities in Scientific American’s recent cover story, “The War on Cancer – It’s Being Lost.” He came to the conclusion that if researchers are to ever succeed in stopping this relentless murderer, they must adopt new perspectives.
The famous British medical publication The Lancet added its voice to the discussion by criticizing the inability of conventional therapy to halt the rise in breast cancer fatalities and pointing out the disconnect between popular perception and reality. “One may be shocked that women are dying at all from this cancer,” it said. “If one were to believe all the media hoopla, the triumphalism of the [medical] profession in published research, and the practically weekly miracle breakthroughs trumpeted by the cancer charities.” The editorial urged academics to “question dogma and redirect research resources along more successful paths,” noting that conventional medicines, including chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery, had been stretched to their breaking point with disappointing outcomes.
A scathing critique by Harvard University’s John Cairns, a microbiology professor, appeared in Scientific American in 1985. It is impossible to identify any abrupt changes in the death rates for any of the major malignancies that could be attributed to chemotherapy, with the exception of a few uncommon cancers. Chemotherapy’s ability to treat any of the common malignancies has not yet been shown.
In actuality, only a small number of cancers—testicular, Hodgkin’s, choriocarcinoma, and juvenile leukemia—can be cured by chemotherapy. Chemotherapy is NOT curative for the majority of common solid tumors, such as those of the lung, colon, breast, etc.
The phrase “Chemotherapy: Snake-Oil Remedy?” appears in a piece.
Dr. Martin F. Shapiro explained in an article titled “That appeared in The Los Angeles Times on January 9, 1987 that while “some oncologists inform their patients of the lack of evidence that treatments work…others may well be misled by scientific papers that express unwarranted optimism about chemotherapy. Others respond when given a financial incentive. Running thriving chemotherapy practices is a considerably more lucrative endeavor for doctors than offering consolation and relief to terminally ill patients and their families.
Dr. Shapiro is not by himself. “As a chemist trained to evaluate data, it is inconceivable to me that physicians can disregard the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than help,” commented Alan C. Nixon, PhD, Past President of the American Chemical Society.
Scientists from the McGill Cancer Center polled 118 physicians who treated non-small-cell lung cancer in 1986. More than 75% of them recruited individuals and conducted lung cancer treatment studies using hazardous substances. They were asked to choose which one of six ongoing trials they themselves would choose if they got cancer. 64 of the 79 respondents claimed they would not agree to participate in a trial including the standard chemotherapeutic medication cisplatin. All of the trials were deemed undesirable by 58 people. their causes? chemotherapy’s ineffectiveness and intolerable level of harm.
In a related 1989 study, renowned German biostatistician Ulrich Abel, PhD, discovered that “many oncologists’ personal views seem to be in striking opposition to communications intended for the public.”
Thomas Nealon, MD, Professor of Surgery at New York University School of Medicine, concluded in 1990 that “The treatment of this tumor now has slipped from too much surgery to too much adjuvant therapy.” Breast cancer activist Rose Kushner wrote that by 1981 “indiscriminate, automatic adjuvant chemotherapy was replacing the Halsted radical mastectomy as therapeutic overkill in the United States.”
Why is chemotherapy used so frequently if it is so ineffective? Well, for starters, pharmaceutical corporations offer huge financial incentives. Chemotherapy cost $3.53 billion in 1990. That amount has more than doubled to $7.51 billion by 1994. A constant rise in cancer fatalities coincided with this relentless rise in the use of chemotherapy.
No disseminated neoplasm (cancer) that was incurable in 1975 is curable today, according to an article by oncologist Albert Braverman, MD, published in 1991. “Many medical oncologists recommend chemotherapy for virtually any tumor, with a hopefulness undiscouraged by almost invariable failure,” he continued.
Why, in the face of such failure, is chemotherapy growing? It is illuminating to consider the financial connections between a major cancer clinic like Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and the businesses that generate enormous profits from the sale of chemotherapy medications. The chairman of the MSKCC Board of Overseers and Managers, James Robinson III, is a director of Bristol-Myers Squibb, the largest manufacturer of chemotherapy medications in the world. Bristol-Myers’ board is led by Richard Gelb, vice-chairman of the MSKCC board. Another MSKCC board member who served as president of Bristol Myers until recently, Richard Furlaud, retired. Director Paul Marks, MD, President and CEO of MSKCC