6. Conventional Cancer Treatment does not treat the whole person
Standard oncology only deals with the physical aspects of cancer, but research shows that addressing your physical, emotional, and spiritual health and not just the cancer itself offers the best hope for a full recovery.
This study reported the following results: A total of 2,638 patients treated at 37 palliative care units from January 2017 to September 2018 were analyzed. The median survival time was 18.0 days in Japan, 23.0 days in Korea, and 15.0 days in Taiwan. Spiritual well-being was a significant factor correlated with survival in Taiwan…
This study looked at breast cancer survival and found that expression of emotion was related to better survival, and suppression of emotion was associated with worse survival.
Several studies have shown that a positive attitude or emotional state can boost your chances of surviving cancer. In one study, among patients with metastatic (spreading) cancers, those who expressed greater hope at the time of their diagnosis survived longer.
7. Conventional Cancer Treatment alone is not as effective as claimed
This study entitled Lessons from a century of cancer chemotherapy, found:
“… the results of over a half-century of clinical trials have shown that the therapeutic approach of combined/dose-dense chemotherapy has not been successful in achieving its primary purpose, which is the induction of long-term disease-free survival in the majority of patients with systemic disease”.
This study published in Annals of Oncology says:
Risk of specific noncancer deaths is substantial, particularly in the year after diagnosis.
Patients with cancer of the lung, pancreas, and brain are most likely to die of their cancer. Patients with breast and prostate cancer are at highest risk of noncancer death. Heart disease, whether from treatment or age, is an important cause of death, as is infection (probably due to treatment).
8. Conventional Cancer Treatment survival rates are exaggerated
The cancer survival rates are greatly exaggerated by the cancer industry so that the donations keep rolling in and big pharma keeps making vast profits. There is a strong inference from these claims that ‘cancer survivors’ have actually beaten cancer, when in fact many ‘survivors‘ still have cancer or are living with debilitating side-effects from the treatment.
Cancer survival should mean dying of old age or from some cause unrelated to cancer or cancer treatment. It should not mean surviving only a few years pumped full of chemical warfare agents and minus body parts.
According to the National Cancer Registry Ireland: At the end of 2019, there were nearly 200,000 patients living after a cancer diagnosis. But this is not what it seems. For example:
- Information published by the National Cancer Control Programme on the HSE’s website says cancer survival starts at the time of diagnosis.
- Over 40,000 people were diagnosed with cancer in 2019 and most would be alive at the end of the year even without any treatment. So only 160,000 are alive one or more years following diagnosis.
- Steven Donnelly TD, Minister for Health in a written reply to Gino Kenny TD on Tuesday, 15 February 2022 stated:
Of the 200,000 estimated cancer survivors in Ireland in 2019, almost a quarter of these were patients with a previous breast cancer diagnosis. - Some of the 200,000 will have a recurrence and die so they are in remission rather than surviving cancer.
- The National Cancer Control Programme goes on to tell us: For those who have metastatic cancer the ‘survivor’ label may not always be considered a good fit as these persons continue to live with cancer every day.
- National Breast Cancer Research Institute
Breast cancer makes up 23% of all cancer survivors (n=45,875), the greatest proportion of cancer survivors in Ireland. - Gov.ie Press Release from Department of Health published on 22 September 2022 says: a quarter of female breast cancer cases diagnosed during 2017-2019 were detected as a result of screening.
- But this Article, published in 2012 in the New England Journal of Medicine, found that 31% of all breast cancers were over-diagnosed (ie they did not have cancer in the first place).
While these figures are held up by the cancer industry to support claims that newer treatments and earlier detection are improving survival, they show nothing of the kind. They are in fact a shocking statistic and a terrible indictment on the so-called Standard of Care.
Improved survival rates over the past 10 years are possibly no better than can be accounted for by:
- overdiagnosis (patient didn’t actually have cancer)
- lead time bias – earlier detection makes it appear that patients are surviving longer
- changes in patient’s diet and lifestyle
- spontaneous remissions
- more use of complementary therapies (57% of breast cancer patients use complementary therapies)
- access to alternative or integrative treatment centres abroad
- greater access to Cancer Coaches
- other factors
9. Conventional Cancer Treatment actually causes cancer
This is what Second Cancers – Landmark Studies The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program of the National Cancer Institute found:
Breast irradiation causes breast and lung cancer
Young women treated with radiotherapy for Hodgkin’s disease (HD) experienced a threefold increased risk of breast cancer, which rose with higher radiation doses to the breast. HD patients treated with radiotherapy had a sixfold risk of lung cancer, with risk related to dose of radiation received.
Women who received pelvic radiotherapy for cervical cancer were found to have a twofold risk of new cancers in organs that were heavily irradiated.
Breast cancer patients initially treated with tamoxifen have a twofold increased risk of uterine corpus cancer, with particularly high risks seen for rare tumors of the mixed mullerian type.
Platinum-based chemotherapy for ovarian cancer increased the risk of leukemia three- to fourfold, and risk rose with increasing cumulative doses to reach eightfold.
This study says:
…Intensity-modulated radiation therapy may double the incidence of solid cancers in long-term survivors.
10. Conventional Cancer Treatment is the only option given to patients.
When Conventional Cancer Treatment fails the patient is told “there is nothing more we can do” when they should be told “there is nothing more we can do but there are Alternative and Complementary therapies you can try.” But that’s not how it works. Why?
The cancer industry has managed to pass laws to protect their profits by making it illegal to use anything other than the highly dangerous so-called “standard of care” (chemo, radiation etc) in the treatment of cancer.
An article published on the World Research Foundation website puts it well: We are absolutely shocked at what medicine has fallen to. It is not an art, it really is not a science any more, it is a deadly game of Russian Roulette! Why? Because we have now accepted therapies that are more harmful and deadly than the original medical problem that we had when we began the therapy. This is absolutely and clearly the fault of the pharmaceutical industry and its capture of the medical profession…
Whatever your type or stage of cancer, Complementary and/or Alternative Therapies can greatly increase your odds of survival.
This Scientific Review says Complementary therapies (used in addition to Conventional Cancer Treatment) have shown a number of beneficial effects.
Complementary Therapies can:
- increase your survival
- reduce treatment side effects
- make treatment(s) work better
- reduce pain, stress, and anxiety
- prevent a recurrence
- boost your immunity
- address the root causes of your cancer
- address lethal cancer stem cells
There are also a number of Alternative Treatments that can help, along with a number of clinics offering Integrative Treatments.
See Tests and Treatments page
Summary
Conventional Cancer Treatment delivers poor survival gains along with a huge physical and emotional toll on patients – but huge profits for the cancer industry – including cancer charities.
In an article entitled Rethinking the war on cancer (Published in The Lancet) the author Douglas Hanahan wrote:
At a gathering of thought-leaders from across cancer research and treatment at the World Oncology Forum, in Lugano, Switzerland, in late 2012, a question was asked: are we winning the war on cancer, 40 years on? The conclusion was, in general, no. Despite the introduction of hundreds of new anticancer drugs, including advanced therapies (so-called magic bullets) aimed at particular weapons in the enemy’s armamentarium, the consensus was that, for most forms of cancer, enduring disease free responses are rare, and cures even rarer.
Treating the symptom instead of the cause?
In his book World Without Cancer; The Story of Vitamin B17, Edward G. Griffin writes:
Orthodox medicine, on the other hand, is totally focused on the tumor. To most oncologists, the tumor is the cancer. If they remove it surgically or burn it away, they happily announce to the patient: “Good news. We got it all!” They may have all of the tumor, but did they get what caused the tumor? And, in the process, did they dislodge some of those malignant cells, causing them to migrate through the circulatory system only to find new homes elsewhere in the body? Is that the reason so many cancer patients die of metastasized cancer to multiple locations only a few months after hearing those ludicrous words: “We got it all”?
If you believe Conventional Cancer Treatment alone is effective, just think about all the people you know who got cancer. How many of them survived?