Tuesday, 28 May 2013

New "System" for Healing Cancer!

In Order to Fully Heal Your Body, You Need Your “SYSTEM” to be Fully "Reconditioned"....  (a bit like a car engine can be.)

Healing cancer with logic and reason is about the clash of ideas for treating cancer. My aim is to explain the logic behind choosing alternative cancer treatments, as I did.

Exposing LOGICAL contradictions in conventional cancer treatments.

Renewing the System

Putting aside surgery that is sometimes essential, conventional treatments are bent on a mission to kill cancer tumours via poison or radiation. In contrast, alternative treatment tends to address the SYSTEM, and its many needs, as a top priority.

When talking about healing cancer, (with alternative cancer protocols), we hear a lot about “building the immune system”, which is obviously a vital component of the job. But in reality, it's not just your immune system you rely on to be healthy or to heal your body..... It's the WHOLE SYSTEM!

For example, you rely on your liver to detoxify your blood. If your liver or kidneys are unhealthy or compromised, your WHOLE SYSTEM will suffer a knock-on effect, and the function of other parts of the body will be less than optimum. Ditto many other internal organs, glands etc. There are systems within systems.

(This includes mental and emotional factors too).

Why Fit People Can Get Cancer Too...

There are thousands of biological components or processes at work in your body, involving millions of important complex tasks each second. Each is interrelated or interdependent in some way.  In other words, there is often a complex chain of essential events that need to happen involving hormones, enzymes, and what have you. And remember, any chain is only as strong as its weakest link. This might help to explain why some obviously fit and active people, to every ones shock, get cancer.

What does this mean?
According to the experts... "The Standard American Diet" (S.A.D) is famously linked to many killer diseases.... including heart disease, cancer, type 2 diabetes and stroke...plus many others! So we can safely assume that most people eating such a diet have a SYSTEM that is probably prone to disease.

New York Times "WHAT will it take to get Americans to change our eating habits? The need is indisputable, since heart disease, diabetes and cancer are all in large part caused by the Standard American Diet. (Yes, it’s SAD.)" http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24bittman.html

It therefore stands to reason, that by building a NEW SYSTEM, (so to speak), we can improve our chances of surviving any disease we are stricken by, including cancer. After all, who wants to fight cancer or heart disease with a system created by an infamous SAD type diet, that has resulted in a life-threatening health crisis?

Every minute your body is renewing and repairing. If it is fed a substandard diet, lacking in lots of vital nutrients, It will build a substandard Body! (And don't be fooled by the exterior. - Many cancer victims looked great in the mirror!)

It's a bit like building a skyscraper with substandard materials. It may look perfectly okay, but Get an earth tremor and It can come crashing down!

It's The System Stupid!

Cancer is a systemic disease. It is born of a sick SYSTEM.  Tumours are a symptom or natural event stemming from an inner environment where normal control mechanisms of the body have started to fail. To heal cancer once and for good is possible only if you address the system that is producing it.

Standard cancer treatment proves this to be true.

Chemotherapy or radiation is given, and commonly the tumour is reduced in size or even apparently wiped out. Everyone celebrates the success. Yet in many cases cancer returns months later. If cancer were just the tumour, then it would be game over when obliterated! Standard medicine does not address the SYSTEM. Like me, if you get cancer you will probably be told to eat anything you like. No attempt to boost your health is made. After surgery and chemo, you are free to go create cancer all over again!!!


Quote: Heart Disease Advice:"Add foods to your diet that are low in cholesterol and saturated fats. Eat more fruits and vegetables. Eat less red meat and fewer high-fat dairy products. Cut down on salt, and avoid fried and processed foods".  http://familydoctor.org/familydoctor/en/diseases-conditions/heart-attack/treatment/tips-for-recovering-and-staying-well.html

(The above is standard Orthodox Medicines' advice, which is probably helpful, but is far from optimal. For example, what does...eat ..."fewer high fat dairy products" actually mean? Eat a few less cream cakes???)

Why is there such a contradiction? The only logical answer is that they employ highly toxic treatment, such as chemotherapy and radiation, and thus it becomes almost pointless to employ nutrition, or attempt to heal the body while at the same time poisoning it! Clearly most such valuable nutrients would be nullified by the treatment in any event, so why go to the trouble. (Let the poor souls at least have something to enjoy!) Having gone through the cancer treatment machine, this was the vibe I tended to sense, and is the only explanation possible. Many report being given similar such advice as I had.

The medical experts cannot have it both ways. If they tell us... "heart disease, diabetes and cancer are all in large part caused by the Standard American Diet." (New York Times).... Then why advise that you CONTINUE WITH IT while battling cancer???????

I can forgive them if they ignore diet / nutrition/ and the system, given that chemo will render the idea hopeless. (not so sure about radiation therapy) But when someone, like myself, decides to decline chemotherapy, then surely diet advice should come into play... (to help save a life... shock horror!!)  Yet they just show you the door. You are left to fend for yourself, and work it out for yourself.  OUR WAY, OR THE HIGHWAY!!

The Gerson Therapy is one such cancer treatment built on this principal. It is famous for its use of juicing. Even the most hideous tumours can disappear...with the right treatment. It's the body that does the healing! Watch how hidious melanoma tumours can disappear.


Reverse-Engineering Your Diet:

The main principle relating to the above, is the key fact that eating a highly nutritious and healthy diet, will DO THE OPPOSITE OF THE STANDARD AMERICAN DIET....and instead of handicapping your body's ability to defend against toxins and keep healthy, will INSTEAD, enhance and boost the body's ability to HEAL ITSELF! (as it is designed to do, if not seriously handicapped)
Obviously, - if not having chemo, this means doing something akin to the complete opposite of how we have been eating to get into a health crisis in the first place.  i.e. stop eating things common to the S.A.D. And instead, eat healthy healing foods and vital supplements. This will normally involve plenty of raw vegetables to ensure an abundance of enzymes, (which are otherwise lost when foods are cooked.) All this helps your body to slowly (and safely) detoxify and gain back health. It is not something achieved over night.

 The Gerson Cancer Therapy/Cure: Can juicing (and change in diet) cure terminal cancer?


I personally did this when I decided to refuse chemotherapy, and employ alternative cancer methods. I ditched all sugar, and started eating like a commando behind enemy lines.... foraging for raw vegetables, filling a large bowl (specially bought so as to hold large amounts of salad etc. which otherwise tumble off a normal plate) and taking a number of recommended supplements, such as selenium etc. I had to get into "survival mode" for several months. This was quite difficult at first, but I figured all this was far less "painful" or unpleasant than six months of chemotherapy, and all the illness and side-effects that go with it.

Watch and listen as the essential theory relating to Gerson Therapy is beautifully explained,  and its extremely LOGICAL and rational approach is underpinned by biology, science, and basic physics.


I must confess that to make things a lot more palatable and tasty, I usually include plenty of sour cream garlic and onion dip, - which I get from a local supermarket.

Not sure how healthy this is, but I commonly add more ground garlic to enhance its cancer-fighting prowess and health benefits. However, this dressing helps me to eat far more such foods than I might otherwise be able to easily consume.

Of course I always included foods identified to have proven cancer fighting attributes. (which incidentally includes garlic and onions) I kept this up for many months, following the guidelines within the Bill Henderson Protocol. I still eat plenty of raw food, and truthfully enjoy it.

Obviously I would not recommend anyone simply rely on diet to beat cancer on its own. It is recommended as one PART of any strategy one might employ with most alternative cancer treatment protocols. (But a major part.)

Below is forceful argument showing how to eliminate cancer for good, instead of endless battles employing chemotherapy and radiation. This lady beat lung cancer.

Ultimately, the SYSTEM is a self healing system, if and when optimum, and not hindered by poor diet. All surgery relies on the body to complete the job. Otherwise it would be futile to even bother.

Fluke or miracle? Or was it a switch to raw food that cured her long standing MS? This woman with MS was obese, wheelchair bound for many years, but now has her health back to NORMAL... through diet... yet her doctors want her to go back on the drugs!!! Orthadox medical doctors cannot comprehend how diet can heal. It simply isn't part of their training or understanding. Drugs are the answer to almost every medical problem! (Simply treating the SYMPTOMS as if it were the disease)

 Hear how she acheived this incredible healing for incurable MS.




Monday, 27 May 2013

Foods that Fight Cancer: A Guide for Sceptics

Are there foods that fight cancer? Plenty!!

Healing cancer with logic and reason is about the clash of ideas for treating cancer. My aim is to explain the logic behind choosing alternative cancer treatments, as I did.

To the sceptic:

Do you agree with... Richard Béliveau who is a leading authority in the field of cancer research,  and among other things, is the director of the Molecular Medicine Laboratory, Haematology-Oncology Division, in the Charles-Bruneau Cancer Centre at Sainte-Justine Hospital, Montreal..... when he asserts that many types of foods (such as garlic, blueberries, raspberries, green tea etc. can actually fight cancer, and have the ability to kill cancer cells or prevent their progress?
(See book: "Foods to Fight Cancer" by Richard Béliveau Ph.d and Denis Gingras Ph.d.)  -and learn about the new concept of  "nutraceuticals" (nutrients with known health benefits)
Yes / No
If your answer is yes, (and therefore accept that his scientific findings are valid) then you may also agree that if the above (fairly commonplace) foods and herbs have proven cancer fighting potential, due mainly to strong natural chemical defence mechanisms evolved over millions of years by plants (to kill parasites, fungus, and insects etc) then it must be quite conceivable (if not extremely likely) that perhaps some rare and more obscure plant/s somewhere in the world (of which there are many thousands of species and varieties) may have... 
much greater cancer fighting capability... than, for example, common foodstuffs like garlic or green tea?

After all, those foodstuffs just happen to be in our food chain (by happenstance) due to being cultivated for centuries, and were not specifically chosen for their capacity to stave off cancer, even if they do.

If you agree with that logical proposition, then perhaps you might consider it quite possible that someone, or some people, at some time in history, may have happened upon such a plant or herb, used it as a medicine, and perhaps eventually cured someones cancer using this substance, (or some  formulation thereof.)

The above is just for purposes of example. One scenario. There are many conceivable variations and possibilities, given the healing properties and cancer-fighting potential of plants.

This clearly opens up the possibility that various forms of food-based cancer treatment may be viable, as claimed by many, but dismissed by the medical elites.

On top of this,  you can deliver such cancer-fighting substances in a more concentrated form by juicing! This guarantees a much easier way to consume mega-doses of the desired nutrients each day...way beyond what most people could happily cope with, given that the fibre will obviously fill you up quickly. Also, it is much easier on the digestive system.

[Add... an intelligent diet and a protocol designed to enhance health and build a strong immune system, and surely you must concede that a successful natural cancer treatment becomes a reasonable possibility.]

It is not a giant leap of logic that some such viable treatments exist. And the above doesn't even bring to the table many other proven anti-cancer measures, such as those involving minerals ect.

So why don't we all know about any such cancer treatments?
For the answer to that you need to read a few books on natural cancer treatments and their history. Any such treatments are quickly quashed. It is no coincidence that all these natural therapies and their promoters get slaughtered by a massively powerful opponent. (Government sponsored defenders of the current system such as the FDA etc).... all apparently in the name of protecting the public.

They care about you so much, that they "protect" you from any doctor offering an alternative cancer treatment, even if your cancer is said to be terminal!

But is there an ulterior motive for crushing these small fry? Could the main motive be protecting, not the public, but almighty never-ending mega-profits reaped from cancer treatment? I can only leave that question hanging. But all such natural foods, plants and herbs cannot be patented. This means massive investment and years of trials and testing....for each potential substance and its components, with no possibility to obtain a patent on anything, and thus zero profits. In effect, a massive loss. But the biggest loss, would be the instant collapse of income from hugely profitable current cancer treatment, should such natural treatments be proven to work.


Add to the above the fact that alternative medicine and "natural treatments" are a totally alien concept to the big Pharmaceuticals, (and standard medicine in general) and there is an obvious conflict of both theory and philosophy of immense size, - bringing to mind the term 'oil and water', if not 'mortal enemies' that tend to loath each other.

Others have investigated and exposed this far better than I ever could. The video below will open your eyes to how alternative treatments are treated by officialdom and mercilessly suppressed.



Documentary video evidence:
Here is a great insight into the plight of alternative cancer treatments. Extreme prejudice, and stubborn resistance to the truth are quite shocking. You will also see evidence of a number of people who have been cured, including a Japanese surgeon who's metastasised liver cancer was cured. As the commentator Say's...he encountered professional bias bigger than Texas and Alaska combined!! Please watch this short film. (10 mins) 

Richard Béliveau is a leading authority in the field of cancer research, who, among other things, is the director of the Molecular Medicine Laboratory, Haematology-Oncology Division, in the Charles-Bruneau Cancer Centre at Sainte-Justine Hospital, Montreal: His book Foods to Fight Cancer is a must for your coffee table or bookshelf, whether you want to prevent cancer or reverse it.

Dr Mercola on Curcumin for Cancer...

The healing power of beet...

Saturday, 25 May 2013

Books on Beating Cancer with Anti-Cancer Diet

Books to Help You Beat Cancer:

Healing cancer with logic and reason is about the clash of ideas for treating cancer. My aim is to explain the logic behind choosing alternative cancer treatments, as I chose to.

One of the first things I did when I was told I had cancer was to
hunt down books that could help me. I believe books saved my life.
Although you might be able to learn a good deal from the
internet, nothing beats a good book. The books below are highly
 recommended for discovering how to eat to both prevent cancer,
and beat cancer.

Never Fear Cancer Again: How to Prevent and Reverse Cancer (Never Be) This book is an essential addition to your bookshelf if you want to A/ avoid cancer, or B/ reverse cancer.

The Bill Henderson Protocol:

I personally chose the The Bill Henderson Protocol as my main starting point. It gave me an excellent book of instructions and strategy to follow, which made good sense. On top of that it doesn't cost a lot to do. In fact most of what you do is about diet, and as you spend money on foodstuff anyway, that is not a big issue. There are some recommended supplements of course, which boost your system, not sold by him by the way, but available in many stores and online. The fact that I'm still alive when others in a similar position back in 2010 who were given chemo are not, suggests it might be effective. See details here: Chemotherapy vs Alternative Cancer Treatment I have also come across a number of others online who say they have beat cancer with this protocol.

What Causes Cancer, and Why?

So What are the Biggest Causes of Cancer?

Unfortunately we Live in a Toxic World! Lovingly created for us by the chemicals industry, Food Industry, and even the medical Industry!

Just Some of The Everyday Things That Can Give You Cancer...

Although there are various theories as to what cancer is, and why it occurs, the following contributing factors are often involved to a substantial degree.

Common thread:  Notice the term INDUSTRY...which looms large. The price we pay for all the consumer products we indulge in, all the convenience we enjoy, is not only paid for with our money, we also pay with our health. Cancer was a very rare disease until the 20th century, and it has increased massively in the past hundred years. Many types of cancers are still rare in some parts of the world where industry and modern lifestyle have yet to make their impact.

Decaff Anyone?




This chemical (Dichloromethane) is used in the processing of decaffeinated coffee in large vats...to extract the caffeine, which is then used for other things, such as energy drinks and colas etc. Nice. This is just one of many hundreds of chemicals used to process our foods and other commodities.

Also, the term "CAUSES" regarding cancer, is a slightly misleading concept. In reality there are usually several contributing factors that play a role in the creation of any cancer.. The body has many defences, but needs to be helped by us!!

For example, if we smoke, we are more likely to get lung cancer. This is proven. But we increase our chances, by eating a diet that provides no protection, such as one crammed with patently unhealthy sugar and highly processed foods, for example. So which is the true culprit? Smoking or poor diet?  They are two halves of the same coin.

[You might say... "but I know someone who smoked ..but ate a good healthy diet, yet he still got cancer". Yes this can happen, but diet is only one element of protection, and by itself, can only help improve your odds. It is not a cast-iron guarantee. I must add that, (generally speaking), most smokers, by definition, are obviously not exactly "health nuts" known for doing the best for their health. Thus this will usually imply less exercise, and less concern for health in general in most cases.]

Likewise, all cancers are CAUSED by a variety of factors. Nevertheless, we should look at the main known offenders...

Putting aside cancers caused by inherited faulty genes, (which only account for a tiny percentage of cases), cancer is known to commonly be caused by the following... (Just a partial sample of course) There are also many suspected substances, but that's getting into speculation territory.

 These are some of the main culprits:

Smoking         Diesel fumes       Burned / Over-cooked meat

Processed meats     Aflatoxin   Alcohol       Some medical drugs

Numerous chemicals         Pesticides,          Heavy metals

Medical  X-Rays          Chemotherapy         Radiation

Gosh, the last two are a touch ironic! You will notice that the main theme here appears to be consumption or exposure to various types of harmful chemicals and poisons.  i.e. we are talking about the body's reaction to a prolonged cumulative dose of chemicals, or  on rare occasions, a large single short-term dose. (such poisoning of the cells can damage DNA causing cells to mutate and get out of control.)

As proved with chemotherapy, (although an extreme example) toxic substances have a  negative effect on the immune system, thus leaving the body with weakened defences as well as being hit by a cellular crisis. A double blow!! (Mutated erratic cells + afflicted immune system!)

Note: Aflatoxin is a natural mycotoxin found in a type of mould.

INFLAMMATION: As we know, inflammation is one significant factor that often starts the cancer ball rolling. Latest studies show that aspirin can halve the risk of some cancers, (tho it can have damaging consequences to health in other ways, but this anti-cancer action is thought (by medical scientists) to be due to the fact that it lowers inflammation. 

(Unfortunately, many people are alergic to aspirin, and so at risk of stomach bleeding and ulcers. And about a third of 50 to 70 years-olds carry the bacterium Helicobacter pylori which makes it likely they will get ulcers or stomach bleeding, so is too dangerous to be a practical strategy in such cases. It can also affect other medications people may be on., which again poses some dangers).

However, there are better natural substances that help minimise inflammation, that can be included in the diet, such as curcumin which is a component of turmeric, common in curry. Curcumin is also available in capsules. Curcumin has been found to have a very strong cancer fighting prowess, and literally kills cancer cells on mass, according to many, including the BBC program "Food Hospital" which shows amazing footage.

Thus, it follows that cancer is often caused (or promoted) by a type of chemical poisoning . (damage - at the cellular level - be it chemical, or radiation, and /or inflammation that often results).  Similar damage may also be caused by viruses such as HPV (Human papillomavirus)

Toxins are the obvious cause of the vast majority of cancers. Cancer is the body's reaction to this toxic overload, which acts as a chemical 'trip-wire' with DNA in the area of the toxic onslaught, and starts a plethora of cellular chaos. At first this may be the body trying to repel the toxins, or encapsulate the damage, or some other defence mechanism.

However, this can possible spin out of control. Perhaps in the healthy, this mechanism is short-lived, and is almost a non-event, and is never even known about, because the issue is resolved quickly. (no tumour) But if the immune system is low we can be in big trouble.

Cancer in History:

The 18th Century Ushers in Cancer

Apparently, it wasn't until the 18th century that the first reports of cancer appeared in scientific literature—such as cancer of the scrotum (found in chimney sweeps in 1775, caused by soot particles) and nasal cancer found in users of snuff (finely ground tobacco) in 1761.

A University of Manchester study has indicated that
cancer-causing factors exist only in modern, industrialised societies—and cancer is fuelled by the excesses of modern life. Otherwise it would be extremely rare.

We now live in a toxic world. It seems virtually everything we consume has the potential to cause cancer nowadays, or alternatively.... hinder your systems' ability to defend against cancer! (which is virtually as bad, but not usually mentioned.) 

In other words, just because something isn't noted as "carcinogenic", doesn't mean it won't in some way hinder your systems' ability to guard against cancer. Thus a substance can indirectly help cause cancer, without being labelled carcinogenic. (Cancers little helpers!)

Example: Sugar: High amounts of sugar will impact the immune system for several hours, leaving you very vulnerable if this is a regular occurrence. A high sugar intake is obviously a disaster waiting to happen.

Modern Highly Processed Foods:

Left to rot...BUT NO!!!

No other lifeforms will eat it!!

Not even mould or bacteria!!

Still fine 6 months later!!!

In any event, there are tens of thousands of chemicals in our lives, most of which haven't yet been properly tested or evaluated for carcinogenic status.

However,  a big contributing factor regarding cancer, irrespective of the above toxic pollution of the body, is a SLUGGISH IMMUNE SYSTEM. If the immune system is compromised in some way, then one is obviously far more prone to cancer. The immune system is the front-line that defends against cancer cells and mutations. (Scientists tell us that everyone has cancer cells occurring daily, but these are quickly wiped out by killer cells) If left unmolested, such abnormal cells can potentially take hold and slowly form a tumour.

Cancer cells are apparently created as some of the 70 Trillion cells we have divide and renew, but inevitably there is an occasional "spelling mistake" - hopefully they are much rarer than mine!

Stress and upset, such as divorce or bereavement, can seriously impact the immune system, leaving you prone to many types of illness. Because of this, the more stressful society becomes, the more cancer there is likely to be.
It follows that boosting your immune system is vital to avoid and prevent cancer. It is obviously also an important aspect for beating cancer. Without a strong robust immune system, you will always be prone to cancer, - and many other illnesses for that matter.

It is known that some cancers are caused by viruses, such as human papillomavirus (HPV), a sexually transmitted disease. But it is also said that contracting cancer in this way is associated with other factors, such as smoking and drinking.( i.e. bad habits of consumption.)

Creating cancer is almost always a cocktail of issues coinciding. Having a strong, fully functional immune system is the best hope of avoiding or guarding against viruses. And, limiting their progress to do us harm.

So to sum up, the most obvious causes of cancer are:

Carcinogenic substances: (such as those I've listed) which are too numerous to count and mention. But not everybody who comes into contact with a particular carcinogen or has an unhealthy lifestyle will necessarily develop cancer.
Poor diet, leaves you depleted of vital vitamins enzymes and protective nutrients key to being healthy. Thus you can be very vulnerable to the above carcinogens, due to weak defences.
Low immune system leaves you vulnerable to all of the above, but also to naturally occurring abnormal mutating cells which may potentially take hold, giving the opportunity and form a tumour.  (This is proven by the fact that people with AIDS and people on immunosuppressive therapy are very prone to cancer, due to their immune system being suppressed.)
Stress and emotional upset: results in the body been flooded with stress hormones known to suppress the immune system, and leave you vulnerable to cancer.
Age: The older we get, the more likely we are to get cancer.  This is probably due to an accumulation of damage to cells over many years. Also, the body's resistance against abnormal cells etc may become less effective as we get older. As we know, all physical capability diminishes with age, so it's no surprise that the body's defences become less dynamic too. However, unlike the reckless young, we can use our loaf as we get older, employ some wisdom, and pay close attention to avoiding risk factors, eat a healthy diet, and consume foods rich in cancer-fighting nutrients.

Lack of Exercise: A moderate amount of physical activity will pay dividends for health. Many studies show that a reasonable amount of exercise such as brisk walking several times a week, lowers your chances of getting cancer.

Books on Anti-Cancer Diet and Foods to Fight Cancer

Luckily the body has certain mechanisms which can protect us from developing cancer. It is thought that cells which are damaged by carcinogens can normally repair themselves. (But without a healthy diet this vital repair work is probably far from guaranteed.)
Ultimately, cancer isn't caused by a single factor, but a combination of factors that contribute towards its creation. So to a large degree, cancer can be avoided. But perhaps you also need a bit of luck!

Thursday, 23 May 2013

"Miraculous" Cancer Survivors Largely Ignored by Cancer Industry.


Image: Office.com

Healing cancer with logic and reason is about the clash of ideas for treating cancer. My aim is to explain the logic behind choosing alternative cancer treatments, as I did.

Imagine that you are tasked with the job of finding the cure for cancer. Imagine that your very life depends on it...

Here are some suggestions:
Instead of focusing almost all efforts on mice and rats, which eat a very different diet, (and are usually bred to be genetically prone to cancer, which makes them a very different organism than us) focus on HUMANS... to find out exactly what is going on, and why some humans survive cancer without standard treatment or drugs.

Example: There are many people who have had “spontaneous remission” from cancer, and a good many that have beat cancer through diet and/or other natural alternative treatments. Yet these are universally ignored and never questioned by anybody, or so they say. This type of event is normally dismissed as a fluke, or a freak event, and so considered as of no real scientific importance. A huge resource is being totally wasted. (Smell arrogance anyone? Or is it the lack of money-making potential?)  Want proof? http://healing-cancer-with-logic-and-reason.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/incurable-cancer-bites-dust.html

Surely it would be useful to study and analyse these important cases, and, “REVERSE-ENGINEER”- (so to speak) - data so as to discover what may have taken place to explain this type of phenomenon. By doing this intense study of various HUMAN people that have eliminated their cancer, some common elements might come to light. Some pennies may start to drop. Surely such people should be the subject of intense study?


THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEATEN CANCER.... CANCER HAS GONE INTO REVERSE.... CANCER HAS BEEN EXTINGUISHED... CANCER HAS DISAPPEARED!!! Many of these people had been declared terminal, with only weeks to live!  But these events are of no interest to the medical profession and the cancer industry whatsoever!!

Does this look like an industry hell-bent on finding a cure for cancer?

Does this explain why deaths from cancer go on rising? And why treatments are only marginally better now than when President Nixon declared war on cancer back in 1971.

"Renewed focus on cancer" (Wikipedia)

"Recent years have seen an increased perception of a lack of progress in the war on cancer, and renewed motivation to confront the disease. On July 15, 2008, the United States Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions convened a panel discussion titled, Cancer: Challenges and Opportunities in the 21st Century.[19] 
It included interviews with noted cancer survivors such as Arlen Specter, Elizabeth Edwards and Lance Armstrong,"(Quote)
(My emphasis added)
Source:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Cancer

Noted cancer survivors? Unfortunately... two of the above proclaimed "cancer survivors", Arlen Specter and Elizabeth Edwards (who had had some apparent success with their cancer drugs treatment) died from cancer not long afterwards, when their cancer returned and spread...a common issue with chemotherapy. So they do consult with cancer survivors.... but only ones that have had chemotherapy. And two of the three "noted cancer survivors" sadly, were not survivors very long!

Note that anyone having conventional cancer treatment will be proclaimed as a success story (or cured) when they are still alive 5 years following diagnosis....when the clock starts ticking. However, as many cases of cancer are relatively easy to treat, like minor skin cancer issues, cancer statistics can be made to look far better that they actually are. Secondly...SOME such people (if their cancer was discovered very early), might conceivably still be alive 5 years on, even if their 'treatment' was shredded wheat!
Example: In my own case, Had I had a colonoscopy 6 years earlier than I actually did, my colon tumour would probably have been discovered at that time.. and the clock would have started ticking at that point. (Six years before actually found). The point being, that provided the cancer is detected early, being alive 5 years after discovery, is not always that difficult to achieve....if it is a slow growing cancer. (Whether taking chemo, or shredded wheat).

Alternative Cancer Treatments:

The objective of natural non-toxic cancer protocols is to eliminate cancer, and also create an internal terrain that is detoxified, healthy, alkaline, and generally unviable to cancer, (and its needs), along with a strong vital immune system.

 (None of these are achieved by chemotherapy of course. In fact it does the exact opposite!).

Researchers at the University of Victoria in British Columbia did a careful follow up study on 200 persons who underwent a "spontaneous remission of cancer". What did they find? They found that a whopping 87% of those people had switched diets, usually to a plant-based vegetarian type diet. Coincidence??? While nobody would suggest this, of itself, is a sure-fire way to cure cancer, it does however suggest it as a very important element, and possibly a key factor for helping to beat cancer. It certainly means you should abstain from eating highly processed DEAD foods that probably helped the cancer to get started in the first place! Most alternative cancer protocols have this as a starting point.  See:  Outsmart Your Cancer, by Tanya Harter Pierce

This guy followed similar advice... and his "baseball sized" tumour was eliminated. Would he still be alive had he been subjected to chemotherapy? That we will never know. But there is a good chance he might not.

(2 mins 44 secs)

To see many more video testimonials...see:

PROOF? Can Cancer be Cured Naturally? Evidence and Testimonials That Prove it Often Can be.

"Radical Remission: Surviving Cancer Against All Odds"

A new book by Dr. Kelly A. Turner

In her New York Times bestseller, Radical Remission: Surviving Cancer Against All Odds, Dr. Kelly A. Turner, founder of the Radical Remission Project, uncovers nine factors that can lead to a spontaneous remission from cancer—even after conventional medicine has failed.

While getting her Ph.D. at the University of California, Berkley, Dr. Turner, a researcher, lecturer, and counselor in integrative oncology, was shocked to discover that no one was studying episodes of radical (or unexpected) remission—when people recover against all odds without the help of conventional medicine, or after conventional medicine has failed. 

Turner points out in her book that not one doctor she asked who had personally witnessed a Radical Remission had tried to publish the case as a classic case study. She also points out that there are over 1,000 reports of "spontaneous remissions" that have been reported in the medical literature, but that they weren't being pursued by researchers as to the commonalities among them. Turner has done that!

Now that's what I'm talking about!!

Chemotherapy, Pharmaceutical Companies, Deception and Malpractice

Who Can You Trust With Your Health and Your Life?

Not The Drug Companies it Seems!

Healing cancer with logic and reason is about the clash of ideas for treating cancer. My aim is to explain the logic behind choosing alternative cancer treatments, as I did.
Question: Is chemotherapy the best modern science can do for cancer? Or is it just that it is the most profitable treatment ever invented? (Even if only a small percentage of patients survive 5 years)
As exposed on BBC news in 2012, reps at a Glaxo Smith Kline convention were being secretly filmed when an executive took to the stage and asked..."Who wants to become a millionaire?!!!!" At this the crowd went wild, screaming whistling and whooping, just like a multi-level marketing bash! Then it revealed what this lot had been up to!

As Reported by The Guardian: Tuesday 3 July 2012

The pharmaceutical group GlaxoSmithKline has been fined $3billion (£1.9bn) after admitting bribing doctors and encouraging the prescription of unsuitable antidepressants to children. Glaxo is also expected to admit failing to report safety problems with the diabetes drug Avandia in a district court in Boston on Thursday.

The company encouraged sales reps in the US to mis-sell three drugs to doctors and lavished hospitality and kickbacks on those who agreed to write extra prescriptions, including trips to resorts in Bermuda, Jamaica and California.
The company admitted corporate misconduct over the antidepressants Paxil and Wellbutrin and asthma drug Advair.
Read the full story:
This is not the first huge scandal relating to pharmaceutical companies, and it won't be the last.
The obvious problem is that we rely on such people / organizations to keep us safe and well, and devise drugs that keep us alive in our hour of need. Like when we get CANCER!
Then we innevitably have doubts about the morals and greed with such companies. Then we ask.... would such companies put great effort into testing and formulating NATURAL NON-TOXIC TREATMENTS...given that that SPELLS ZERO PROFITS due to the fact that natural substances cannot be patented. I don't think so!
And would they indulge in dirty tricks to smear and DESTROY ALL COMPETITION? That is probably a silly question!

Dr Peter Gotzsche Speaks Out About Big Pharma...

On realising that medical drugs are the THIRD BIGGEST KILLER in the western world, after heart disease and cancer, this Danish doctor decided to research how and why...and the answer is MONEY MONEY MONEY!!! and corruption on a world-wide scale...as he describes in this short video.

7 mins

Natural News has more eye-popping stories on this topic exposing
malpractice and unfettered greed:


Wednesday, 22 May 2013

Toxic Cancer Treatments Exposed as Lethal

Toxic Cancer Treatments Kill 15,000 Patients Every Year in UK Alone...

Further evidence as to the harmful effects of chemotherapy and radiation therapy...(if any more were needed)

Medicine is now a high risk industry, like aviation. But, the chance of dying in an aviation accident is one in 2 million, while the risk of dying from a medical accident is one in 200!"
--Dr. Leape of the Harvard Medical School of Public Health

Cyclophosphamide iv Sadly, a lot of highly effective
 alternative cancer treatments and protocols are being completely ignored due to political correctness and gross ignorance. They have been so ruthlessly suppressed and mocked, that it is political suicide to even suggest that they may offer hope. Yet toxic cancer treatments that wreck the immune system and damage vital organs are seen as "state of the art medicine" that cannot be questioned. But now at least someone in authority is trying to get things changed, so that more innovative approaches might be applied. That man is Lord Saatchi.

The Daily Telegraph reports: (Figures below refer to UK)

15,000 people die every year because of cancer treatments, Lord Saatchi says

More than 15,000 people die every year because of cancer treatments rather than the illness itself, Lord Saatchi has said.

Cancer drugs and radiotherapy weaken the immune system, leaving patients vulnerable to potentially fatal infections.

Lord Saatchi told the House of Lords: "What we do know is that the cancer drugs do such damage to the immune system that the patient is helpless to resist fatal infections like E.coli or MRSA or septicemia."
(He could have listed many more ways that these treatments can lead to death)
He later told The Daily Telegraph: "No one is to blame for this. The reason that doctors give patients these very damaging drugs is because there is nothing else."
Lord Saatchi has introduced a Medical Innovation Bill in the House of Lords, which intends to encourage doctors to come up with more creative forms of treatment.
 In other words, in the current system doctors cannot deviate from standardized practice, for fear of legal consequences, or charges for medical malpractice. However, the status quo guarantees no new breakthroughs that might otherwise come to light or show promise. This is the point if the Bill.

But is there really "nothing else"?

As might be expected, no real mention of alternative cancer treatments...which seem to be taboo in the higher realms of  Society and Government. This is perhaps due to an education system that rightly values experts and science, but unfortunately such highly paid, highly regarded experts, cannot admit to going in the wrong direction for decades, costing many billions of dollars, and millions of lives....even though it obviously has done! .A BIT LIKE THE IRAQ WAR!!!   A BIT LIKE THE BANKING SYSTEM... Expert's never get anything wrong!!!
Full Telegraph Story Here:

What is the REALITY of modern cancer treatment?

To Further Quote Lord Saatchi:

Driven by what he sees as the primitive reality of the cancer ward. (While visiting his sick wife before she died)

Quote: on modern cancer treatment.(Not pleasant)
“I have witnessed scenes that would not be permitted in a Hollywood horror movie.” Hair loss may be the most obvious side-effect but it is the least appalling. The drugs mimic the disease, causing nausea, diarrhoea, vomiting, fatigue. “Worst of all, they cause such damage to the immune system that the woman is as likely to die from the treatment as from the cancer itself.”

“Have you ever seen a chemotherapy room in a hospital? I hope you haven’t. It’s death row. If you were to lift her gown, you would see that the woman’s arm makes a heroin addict’s arm look attractive. There are so many attachments. What you have here is a situation where the woman is first tortured and then dies. Why? Because this is what is required by law. If doctors don’t stick to standard procedure, the consequences are that they could lose their livelihood, their reputation, and face ruin. So they are obliged to repeat a failed experiment over and over again. “Josephine had chemotherapy and a gigantic operation and every procedure you can imagine; every 'oscopy’ there is. Grotesque. Medieval.”

The above account is extremely similar to the experience of Bill Henderson and the fate suffered by his first wife, who is said to have been killed by the treatment, not cancer itself. This consequently spurred him to look for answers, and tireless research into credible alternative cancer treatments. 

The Bill Henderson Protocol:

The above horror sums up perfectly why I chose to try alternative cancer treatments! (Primarily the Bill Henderson Protocol).

With the Bill Henderson Protocol you simply take a range of known non-toxic cancer fighting foods and suppliments that build your immune system and heal you from the inside, enjoying tasty natural foods etc that clean your system and make it alkaline, whereas most cancer patients are strongly acidic. To learn more about the Bill Henderson Protocol go here!

Many doctors are beginnng to see the light. Some have written books on alternative approaches. I will list my favourite ones shortly.
Incidentally, I was made aware of this long ago. Partly because I made it my business to read extensively on the subject, and secondly because the small-print on the chemotherapy form I was given to sign, stated "Estimated chance of death due to this drug treatment is 1 in 200 to 1 in 500", - or words to that effect. But it went on to say that this danger is far outweighed by your chances of dying due to your cancer. (I must add that this chemotherapy was a new TRIAL drug, so where they got their estimates from is anyones guess.)

Tuesday, 21 May 2013

Chemotherapy Deaths and Hidden Statistics

NHS is 'Masking' Number Of Patients Dying Of Cancer Treatment, Warns Lord Saatchi

It seems likely that many people proclaimed by a doctor to have died of cancer, were actually killed by the treatment... not the disease!

Healing cancer with logic and reason is about the clash of ideas for treating cancer. My aim is to explain the logic behind choosing alternative cancer treatments, as I did.

It is common practice for a doctor or pathologist to declare that the patient has died from cancer, even if the real cause was organ failure or some other crisis ultimately caused by "side-effects" of radiotherapy or chemotherapy.

This practice hides the true record of harm and failure evident with modern cancer treatments like chemotherapy. This is probably widespread in the United States and other countries too. Judging by the video interview below, it seems very evident it is!

According to The Huffington Post...

The NHS is "masking" the number of cancer patients that die from their treatment, Lord Saatchi has said.

The peer said that up to 15,000 cancer patients could be dying annually in the UK.... from their treatment!!  but official figures only classify the underlying cancer as the cause of death.

Lord Saatchi said that doctors should know about the effect of the treatments. (They obviously do)
And he said that it is "dis-empowering" to patients because it denies them access to information about treatments.

Later today, he will ask a Parliamentary question about the number of such deaths, but is expecting to be told the the Office For National Statistics does not hold such data.

"In other words, the statistics do not reveal whether 1% or 100% of cancer patients ultimately die from the treatment or from the disease," he said.

"That is the problem.
"So the point is that Big Data, which is supposed to be the cure for everything, has not arrived in the world of cancer where statistics are not available to distinguish death from cancer versus death from treatment."

Read Full Report from Huffington Post

But it seems this could be a massive underestimate, judging by the interviews below, regarding the results of autopsy...

The ubiquitous practise of cover-up following autopsy:
Dr. Michael Farley talks about the damage cancer treatments like chemotherapy and radiation does to the body. He also has a surprising statistic regarding cancer and causes of death. It might make you consider different treatment options. 

What is normally revealed (and kept quiet) at autopsy will shock you!

iHealthTube.com - Traditional Therapies Kill, Not Cancer

Not allowed to tell the truth, false misleading pathology reports hide the true facts about conventional cancer treatments. If you're not honest about TRUE RESULTS of your treatments, how can you ever make progress? You cannot progress in medicine unless you learn from your mistakes. But these mistakes (patients killed by the treatment) are not allowed to be recorded!

If you want to lose your job and livelyhood, give the true cause of death!

Chemotherapy Vs Alternative Cancer Treatments?

"Alternatives to Chemotherapy"....

That's the term I typed into Google after being diagnosed with Stage 3 colon cancer...and reading about the many horrific side-effects chemotherapy is famous for. Surely there must be something better than this! I thought.

Three years on, I'm writing this blog, - after a great deal of research and many books read, - with a view to investigating and explaining the basic concepts behind alternative cancer treatment in logical terms, to dispel the myth that it's all irrational unscientific nonsense, and doesn't work. This is totally untrue. I will show many examples of success, even with terminal cases, whereby victims have been given just a few months to live.

When Two Out of Three is Bad!

At around the same time I got that dreadful diagnosis, (2010) there were two notable (celebrity) cases of stage 3 bowel cancer in the news here in the UK. One was Bee Gees legend Robin Gibb, the other was a much loved professional footballer at Exeter City. Reports suggested our cases were very similar, so I followed their progress with interest. However, following their colon surgery, unlike me, they both opted for the usual chemotherapy. I instead, opted for a mix of alternative cancer treatments.

Sadly, despite regular news reports about how successful their treatment had been and how well they were doing, within two years or so of starting chemotherapy treatment, both were dead.

I'm now pretty glad I went to Google and typed in...
"Alternatives to chemotherapy"!!

I do not consider that this proves anything beyond doubt, there are many far more impressive cases than mine, but it serves as an example of the dilemma. And it obviously shows that chemotherapy is far from safe and far from ideal.


Daily Mail Report...

Did this grandfather, 78, really beat 'incurable' cancer just by changing his diet? 

Extraordinary story of the man who got 'all-clear' after swapping red meat and dairy products for 10 fruit and veg a day 

Doctors told Allan Taylor, 78, in April that his cancer couldn't be treated and had spread from his colon to his small intestine
  • In August the retired oil rig engineer from Middlesbrough got another letter - to say he was cancer-free
  • He puts the change down to his new diet, which he adopted after looking up 'colon cancer cures' on the internet
Read full story: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2204080/Grandfather-incurable-cancer-given-clear-swapping-red-meat-dairy-products-10-fruit-veg-day.html#ixzz2p54ESVmD

Concept: When you radically change your diet, you radically change your internal environment and biochemistry....from one that supports the cancer process, to one that potentially shuts it down. 

Of course a radical change of diet is not, (by itself) always enough to get rid of cancer, but it is a fundimental starting point.

After a lot of searching, I eventually chose The Bill Henderson Protocol which coincidentally employs similar supplements as this man used to essentially attain a similar healing process, and a body state where cancer cannot easily thrive. This is a logical safe approach that's ignored by Orthodox Medicine, in favour of attacking tumours with highly toxic radiation and drugs.

The above case is just one of many many cases whereby ordinary people have cured their cancer with alternative approaches, even sometimes after being given just a few months to live by doctors. Is it a coincidence that most of these people had a major change of diet? This web site reveals the logical explanation as to why these things work.

Note: Being sceptical is healthy. I am that way inclined myself on many things. However, unlike flying saucers or ghosts or fairies....there is an abundance of "LIVING PROOF" that alternative cancer treatments work. And there is a lot of (DEAD) PROOF that chemotherapy etc often doesn't!

*Chemotherapy for some cancers is close to hopeless, but it is still prescribed in the absence of anything better in the medical toolbox.  No alternative natural options will ever be discussed.

Over the last three years I have done a lot of research and read many books on the subject of cancer, and alternative approaches to treatment. The more one investigates, the more one see's serious folly relating to modern cancer treatment, which has made very little progress over the last 50 or 60 years, despite the so-called "war on cancer" declared back in 1971 by President Nixon..

If orthodox cancer treatments like radiation and chemotherapy were usually very successful, I wouldn't be writing this. But that, sadly, is far from true. The current paradigm is logically at odds with all reason. It resorts to treating a disease usually caused (we are told) by toxic chemicals... with a huge dose of toxic chemicals!

If you do something for many decades and appear to be getting almost nowhere, and progress is dismally slow...and successful outcomes are only a small percentage....then perhaps one should consider a serious rethink. However, when it comes to cancer treatment, there's just one problem...

The TREATMENT of cancer is patently a dismal failure...But...

The BUSINESS of cancer is a gigantic success!!!

Given that cancer survival statistics have only improved by around 5% or so in over 50 years, should we not be asking....IS IT POSSIBLE THEY ARE ATTACKING THE PROBLEM IN A TOTALLY MISGUIDED WAY???
In 2010 I was diagnosed with stage Ill bowel cancer. The tumour was so large they couldn't get past it with the colonoscope!  That was alarming!!  However,  following a successful 5 hour operation, I then found myself facing the prospect of a 6 month course of chemotherapy.

However, on reading the folder of documents provided, I became aware of just what I was letting myself in for. The list of (very likely) side-effects read like a horror story, and the stated chance of death (from the treatment) was stated as 1 in 200. This is how TOXIC this "medicine" is. And recent figures suggest that every year 15,000 cancer patients in the UK die - not from their cancer, but as a direct result of toxic chemotherapy. That's about 5 TIMES the death toll of 9/11 every year!

And they claim that chemo drugs are much better nowadays than they used to be!! Has this treatment been killing a similar amount every year for the last 50 years???  That would mean perhaps 750,000 deaths not from cancer, but directly from the toxic side effects??? (UK only)

Imagine the likely 'chemo death toll' for the United States, with a population 5 times bigger than the UK!!
I''m no mathematician, but that perhaps implies (because the same drugs etc are commonly involved) a side-effect death rate of 75,000 p.a. (A similar death toll to the atomic Bomb on Nagasaki in World War 2 which killed a similar number.) Thankfully not something done every year for 50 years!!!


Why haven't we heard about this? Because "cause of death" is usually declared to be attributed to the underlying illness, not the medication that has been the true cause.

NOTE: The above is less surprising when you consider that the 4th biggest cause of death in the United States is...ADVERSE REACTION TO PRESCRIBED DRUGS! (And as chemo related deaths are it seems, not included (?) then even this is possibly a big underestimation.)

And when doctors go on strike anywhere in the world.... death rates drop quite dramatically! Is it any wonder?

And... any doctors who offer a reasonable alternative to all this carnage are labelled a quack!!

There are many web sites and commentators that insist that alternative cancer treatments are bogus or cannot work. They argue that modern medicine is the only answer. They are typically self-righteous, and resort to calling anyone who disagrees with them "loons"  or "quacks".
To be fair, there are a few cranks on both sides of the issue. However, I take exception to the term "QUACK" when it is aimed (as it often is) at qualified medical practitioners, biologists, experts and scientists, who know all the biology and medical science and facts, but simply come to different conclusions (and answers) to those of standard medicine.

They will often point to the fact that a treatment is "unproven"...but proving a treatment takes literally hundreds of millions of dollars, big laboratories and many years of trials, animal studies, human studies etc etc...usually way beyond what a lone doctor or scientist could handle or fund. That's why we are at the mercy of giant pharmaceutical companies, - and related interests....and Governments.... that are often swayed by their lobbyists, and their assessments and their statistics.

I would make the logical point that every PROVEN theory...was once an UNPROVEN theory!  
However, surely anyone unfortunate enough to get cancer should have the right to choose....in a free society. But doctors are prohibited by law from offering alternative treatments, let alone setting up human trials.

You should know that whether you choose chemotherapy or an alternative cancer treatment, there is some risk involved. Neither carry any guarantee.

The risk involved with alternative cancer treatment:

There's always a chance it may not work for some reason in your particular case. (Because of small genetic differences, no medication has a 100% success rate, and probably never will) But if so, you can simply change tack....try another protocol...and even another. This is because they are non-toxic. Harm is very unlikely. The main concern is that alternative cancer treatments tend to work slower, (due to not being nearly so aggressive)  so if there is urgent need to remove a tumour, (if  assessed as life-threatening for example) then it may be wise to seek surgery or conventional treatment. You will not have the luxury of time. The second weakness is the patients' resolve. If not absolutely 100% focused and committed, or if one is distracted by life... and other concerns,  then one may fail to keep up the necessary protocol with the needed discipline. Slacking off will obviously compromise the effectiveness of the treatment. Giving up the Standard American Diet, with all its (designed to be tempting) pleasurable foods, is almost as difficult as giving up smoking!! However, staring death in the face is a very big motivator for most of us!

The risk involved with Conventional Cancer treatment:

Unfortunately conventional radiation and chemotherapy are admittedly very toxic. The stated side-effects involve a list as long as your arm, and include hair loss, but in the words of Lord Saatchi, that might be distressing, especially for a woman, but this is the "least unpleasant" aspect you face with chemotherapy.

Lord Saatchi (who recently lost his wife to cancer) told the House of Lords: "What we do know is that the cancer drugs do such damage to the immune system that the patient is helpless to resist fatal infections like E.coli or MRSA or septicemia".
I have witnessed scenes that would not be permitted in a Hollywood horror movie.” Hair loss may be the most obvious side-effect but it is the least appalling. The drugs mimic the disease, causing nausea, diarrhoea, vomiting, fatigue. “Worst of all, they cause such damage to the immune system that the woman is as likely to die from the treatment as from the cancer itself.”

More than 15,000 people die every year because of cancer treatments rather than the illness itself, Lord Saatchi has said.(in the UK alone.)
Toxic Cancer Treatments Kill 15000 pa in UK

I would like to point our that obviously not everyone suffers such horrendous problems with chemo, and, for some reason, some sail through it relatively unscathed.
Empowering yourself is an essential factor. You do this with knowledge. If you have that knowledge, you can make better informed choices. Without it, you are at the mercy of doctors and the cancer industry. Is there a better way?

1/ If cancer has been growing for 5, 7, or more years to this point, why would a few more days make any difference. What's the rush? (Logic says this is nonsense in the vast majority of cases).
2/ It is known that chemotherapy drugs (and radiation) are toxic and carcinogenic, (cause cancer) so why would I sign up for this dangerous treatment?
3/ If chemotherapy destroys my immune system... won't that leave me extremely vulnerable, and how is it going to kill off stray cancer cells that can spread to other areas?


So should the toxic chemotherapy etc fail, as it often can do, then one is left in a much worse position, without an immune system designed to terminate cancer cells.

Despite decades of "research" and so-called new "breakthroughs" almost every week... (or so they tell us), conventional treatments are little better than 50 years ago. Most improvements claimed are due to statistical manipulation, and earlier diagnosis due to modern screening programs. But actual cancer treatment is still very questionable. 

Top physicist suggests current cancer theory is wrong.  Recently, the National Cancer Institute conscripted a top theoretical physicist without any medical knowledge or training, to crack cancer. Professor Paul Davies and his team of leading scientists have come to some startling conclusions. His talk on cancer can be seen in this post, where amazingly, his conclusions on cancer suggest Orthodox medicine has got it badly wrong, and much of his theory on cancer has much more in common with alternative cancer doctors and writers! (The ones commonly referred to as quacks!!) Read more, see video

Disclaimer: No part of this web site represents medical advice. It is for informational purposes only. Please see a trained professional if you have cancer. The fact that I decided to reject chemotherapy, is not to suggest that anybody else should. Each case is different.

Compilation of alternative cancer "miracles" and success stories...on this blog


How I, like many others before me, discovered a safe and reliable way to treat cancer...

Why I Rejected Chemotherapy, Fired my Oncologist, and What I Did Instead...