Tuesday, 21 May 2013

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...


  1. Hi Richie - Visiting your site after your leaving a comment on my lens on Squidoo. I can tell you right now, that if any of my family is ever touched by cancer there is no way in the world that we will go down the chemo path. I constantly wonder why anyone in their right minds, after visiting an oncology ward for the first time and seeing the war zone of victims, would even THINK about staying for their first treatment. Like you say, cancers discovered have lived for years in our bodies, so why wouldn't you give yourself a week, a month or so and do some credible research before succumbing to chemical warfare? There's a ot of fearmongering at play here.
    The father of a friend of mine had exactly your form of cancer, and was refusing chemotherapy and was told he'd die. I asked if he would like to look at some alternative treatments. He was more than willing to do that. Thereafter he just thirsted for more and more.Then he completely changed his diet and was six months later pronounced cancer free.

    Right now I have two friends undergoing chemo and I am certain they won't live. One has to have 35 sessions of radiation once she has finished the treatment of chemo!!!!!! I'm stil in shock. Their explanation is that, despite the cancer having shrunk 75% they have to treat from where she was when she was first diagnosed. Sorry! That's criminal in my view.
    Here is a link to a free book Richie. It's a little sickening to say the least, but I'd love the whole world to read it. It highlights the extent to which the FDA went to discredit a doctor who was having wonderful success with cancers. http://www.whale.to/m/binzel.html
    And here's another worthwhile site. http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/cancer/to-the-cancer-patient
    Stay well Richie. And thanks so much for reading my lens.
    Maria (AKA rattie on Squidoo!)

  2. Have just posted this on Twitter!

  3. Hi Maranna, You make some great points. When I was sent to the Oncology department, I felt I just wanted to get out of there. I sat outside if there was a long wait. Without the internet, I would have been blissfully ignorant of what was in store, and like most people would have signed up. And I would never have known that there were plenty of great alternative treatments and options available.

    Thanks to the internet...and Amazon, I was able to read and educate myself, and thus escape the Alice in Wonderland rabbit hole leading down to the mad bad world of CHEMOLAND!

    Thanks again, and for the books you recommend.

    Regards, Richie.

  4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.