Thursday, 26 September 2013

New Breast Cancer Test Means 50% Can Now Avoid Chemo Altogether!

But Alarmingly...Study Showed That 66% of Early Stage Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemo Didn't Actually Need to. (Sky News)


Yes, it's official, according to Sky News, (UK) 2 in every 3 women taking chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer are actually doing so with no actual benefit and thus having months of unnecessary chemotherapy.

And... (according to medical authorities cited below) only 4% of these women ultimately benefit from chemotherapy!

So how come so many women are getting chemo they don't need?

Why? We are told that until now, there was no way to accurately predict which tumours were most likely to return or spread. Thus everyone has been treated as if their cancer is the most dangerous type.

New Genetic Test:

NHS Oncotype DX test:  (UK National Health Service) This test looks inside the tumour and the genes involved, and can give a much more personal assessment of the chances of it coming back.

According to Sky News, thousands of women with breast cancer could soon be spared chemotherapy each year following the approval of a test that will become available on the NHS. (UK National Health Service)

Nearly 50,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer per year in the UK and most have the early-stage disease. Most will be given chemotherapy which is standard treatment following surgery. However, this new test could spare almost half of these victims the awful prospect of chemo, and all it entails.

"Only 4 in 100 women BENEFIT from chemotherapy"
(according to manufacturer of the Oncotype DX test.)
Source, GENOMIC / NICE as featured on  Sky News

(A rare admission that only 4% benefit from chemo!)

Presumably 96 in every hundred women do not benefit from chemotherapy..???



Sorry, but surely (IF TRUE) the fact that almost 50% of all women stricken with this disease will be spared chemotherapy should be HEADLINE news! Why is it partially buried or down-played?

One possible answer is that the above facts show that the vast majority of women that have endured chemotherapy...didn't actually need it. Many have thus suffered needlessly. And we are informed that chemo toxins stay in the body for up to 10 years!

Story as appears in Telegraph Online

However, if true, this new test appears to be very good news for thousands of women diagnosed with this type of cancer.

Studies have suggested that almost half of women with [the most common form of] early-stage breast cancer given the new Oncotype DX test could now be spared chemotherapy.

The proposed test involves examination of genes taken from a sample of tumour tissue removed during surgery to help doctors decide whether chemotherapy would actually benefit patients and reduce the risk of cancer coming back or spreading.

Doctors will use the test, along with other information such as the size and grade of the tumour, to assess whether chemotherapy would be beneficial, - or can be avoided altogether. In other cases, doctors may calculate that certain patients are at a higher risk of their cancer returning than previously thought, and so put them on a higher dose to improve their chance of beating the disease.

Currently, we are told that some people are over or under treated, because of uncertainties about whether their cancer is likely to spread. So a lot of chemo is patently given, just to be on the safe side, so to speak.

Normally all those with early-stage breast cancer face intensive chemotherapy treatment, with likely side effects including nausea, vomiting, insomnia, hair loss and fatigue, and possible complications due to toxic effect and compromised immune system.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has approved the Oncotype DX test for people with oestrogen receptor positive (ER+), lymph node negative (LN-) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) early breast cancer who are at intermediate risk of the cancer spreading.

NICE director Professor Carole Longson said: "Breast cancer patients face significant emotional and psychological strain when considering chemotherapy".

And explained,

"A test that can help to predict better the risk of the breast cancer spreading, and therefore the potential likely benefit of additional chemotherapy, represents a significant step forward for patients."

15 studies and more than 6,000 patients worldwide have taken place using Oncotype DX.
The results show that about one third of treatment plans are changed as a result of the test.

Considering the vile nature of chemotherapy, this is obviously great news. In fact 46% of women will potentially escape chemo altogether. But what to do if you are in the lucky group?

What does all this actually mean? It seems to prove that millions of cancer patients are getting devastating chemo and radiation treatment for a very low grade of tumour or cancer threat, that has little likelihood of killing the patient. Many cancers are not hugely dangerous, and could, with sense, be easily treated with a suitable natural non-toxic protocol....with zero harm.

What to do instead?

If you find you have been spared the need to have chemo, it seems likely that you will be given no instruction on natural anti-cancer measures. In fact in my experience, one is normally told to continue as normal, eat anything you like...cream cakes, burgers, fast food, cola drinks, etc etc. (# insane!!!!)

Clearly that is totally reprehensible, given that these foods are all known to play a supporting role in many killer diseases, including cancer, and the fact that science has confirmed so much about how certain foods and plants have great anti-cancer properties. This is no longer "old wives tales" but scientifically endorsed fact.

The Fire-break Strategy:
Ideally, one should start an eating and supplement regime to totally distance yourself from cancer, and the environment which resulted in that process. A clean-up to ensure your system is totally free of cancer cells and debris relating to any treatment or surgery one has had, will improve you odds significantly. Reverting back to old ways may be very unwise.

Once done, you can revert back to more normal, but healthier eating habits.

Never Fear Cancer Again: How to Prevent and Reverse Cancer (Never Be)

If one is in that happy position, it seems a good idea to make some major changes to diet and lifestyle, avoid all obvious toxins, and follow a good non-toxic alternative cancer treatment program to give yourself maximum chance of a return to full health. After all, the cancer arose from somewhere. And simply removing a tumour with surgery leaves the exact same body and issues that created cancer in the first place. In other words it's a fantastic opportunity to learn how to CANCER-PROOF YOURSELF and how to avoid ever getting cancer again. This book provides a host of practical strategies to vastly improve your chances of success.

Foods to Fight Cancer: Essential foods to help prevent cancer

*  Give up sugar a.s.a.p. cancer is dependant on high levels of glucose.
*  Eat mainly raw fruit and vegetables
*  Buy a juicer and learn to juice for fantastic health benefits
*  Get a copy of this book and learn about cancer fighting foods
*  Get plenty of regular exercise
*  Minimise meat and dairy for several months
                          *  Avoid stress as much as possible

Anticancer: A New Way of Life

There is obviously a danger that many women will see this as a green light to go back to old ways and continue the same mistakes that created the health crisis in question. And even if the test implies that the cancer in unlikely to spread to other sites, this is not not 100% certain fact. This book explains how you must change your life in order to remain FREE OF CANCER.

Such books can supply vital insights and save you from repeating the same nightmare.

Friday, 20 September 2013

How to Turn Cancer ON or OFF at Will

Yes, it is PROVEN that cancer can be turned On or Off at simply controlling ONE common foodstuff!

Ref: The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health


Some people ask whether food has any effect on cancer. (some are even doctors!) 

In this post you will learn about a common foodstuff consumed by millions, which...

when consumed by lab rats in larger amount, (20% of calories) they ALL get cancer and die of the disease.

But when consumed in small amount, (5% of calories)....NONE get cancer, and none die of the disease.

Surely if you were a lab rat, you would choose to be in the second group!!!

So what is this mysterious foodstuff? And should you cut down?

THE CHINA STUDY reveals startling evidence which shows that:

Rats given a specific carcinogen, (aflatixin) and then fed a 20% ANIMAL PROTEIN DIET, will develop cancer 100% of the time.

Meanwhile... their counterparts, - those fed only 5% ANIMAL PROTEIN DIET, developed ZERO CANCER 100% of the time!

Amazingly, this shows that a highly carcinigenic cancer-promoting toxin is rendered essentially harmless.... except when a high animal protein diet is consumed!

In fact they found that by this means, they were able turn cancer on and off like a light switch!

The above experiments, carried out by the authors of  "The China Study" T. Colin Campbell, PhD and Thomas M. Campbell, followed earlier experiments conducted in India. At first, nobody believed it could be true. But further identical experiments replicated this phenomenon.

Interestingly, the protein in question is from cows milk. (casein) and...vegitable protein has no such harmful effect.

Why have the public not been informed of such mind blowing findings?

Obviously this evidence supports the practice of eliminating animal protein from the diet completely, while fighting cancer with alternative cancer treatment, as well understood by those involved in the alternative camp, but dismissed by those in Orthodox medicine.

In other words, it would seem like animal protein in some way helps cancer to thrive, or (more likely) hinders the body in its ability to destroy mutating cells. HOW this helps cancer to start and flourish is not too important.

Anyone that doesn't cut down on animal protein or severely restrict it, must be crazy following that scientific finding.

But does it apply to humans? Consider the facts:




Plentiful Evidence:

In countries with low intake of animal protein, we see far less cancer. It is only rising as they become wealthier and incorperate similar eating habits to ourselves in the West.

In the West, cancer was once rare too. Most people could not afford meat on a daily basis.  It was a sunday treat for many. And small portions were the norm. Only with intensive farming and industrialization plus modern processing did we start to get easily affordable meat and dairy for the masses. Massive propaganda in the press and slick advertising campaigns promoted "protein" and meat products as the way to a strong and healthy body. All supported by Government.

In truth, the evidence points to the fact that too much animal protein is a major source of ill health, and disease, and it is wise to limit your intake.

The China Study includes a huge range of information and data, along with illustrations, charts, and descriptions and findings of experiments related to cancer and other killer diseases.

The main focus of this huge study covering vast areas of China, where, importantly, 87% of the population are of the same ethnic group, (the Han people). Thus ethnic differences or genetic background were not a major issue here, meaning diet and environment are more likely to explain differences regarding disease rates.

Please note that cancer rates in China at the time were very low compared to the West, but...

Astonishingly, they found that in some areas of China, cancer rates were 100 TIMES HIGHER in some parts of China than in other parts!! (That's 10,000% higher!) How could this be? What does this prove? And... why do the most affluent peoples in rural China get far more cancer?

Explaination:: The most affluent people in developing countries apparently get more cancer, possibly because they eat a lot more meat and animal protein than their poorer counterparts. They will, however, continue to eat their traditional foods, but include a greater amount of meat protein foods. (Thus the main difference between the two groups is amount of animal protein consumed)

However, the most affluent people in the West do not get more cancer than the poor,. This is explained because they are not eating such a hideously low grade diet! They can afford to eat the best of everything and thus have a far better general diet, including fruit and vegitables. In fact they get less heart disease, strokes, and often live several years longer on average.

The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health

The China Study: The Most Comprehensive Study of Nutrition Ever Conducted and the Startling Implications for Diet, Weight Loss and Long-term Health


This is vitally important, especially if you seek to eliminate cancer by natural non-toxic means.


Sunday, 8 September 2013

Faking and Fiddling Cancer Statistics

Studies on Cancer Treatments Fixed and Fiddled...(From the Horses Mouth!)

There's clear evidence that cancer treatment statistics are often highly questionable, if not downright fraudulent!

(Reuters) - A former researcher at Amgen Inc has found that many basic studies on cancer -- a high proportion of them from university labs -- are unreliable, with grim consequences for producing new medicines in the future.

"In cancer science, many 'discoveries' don't hold up". (Reuters)

During a decade as head of global cancer research at Amgen, C. Glenn Begley identified 53 "landmark" publications -- papers in top journals, from reputable labs -- for his team to reproduce. Begley sought to double-check the findings before trying to build on them for drug development.

Result: 47 of the 53 could not be replicated. He described his findings in a commentary piece published on Wednesday in the journal Nature.

"It was shocking," said Begley, now senior vice president of privately held biotechnology company TetraLogic, which develops cancer drugs. "These are the studies the pharmaceutical industry relies on to identify new targets for drug development. But if you're going to place a $1 million or $2 million or $5 million bet on an observation, you need to be sure it's true. As we tried to reproduce these papers we became convinced you can't take anything at face value."

Other scientists worry that something less innocuous explains the lack of reproducibility.
Part way through his project to reproduce promising studies, Begley met for breakfast at a cancer conference with the lead scientist of one of the problematic studies.
"We went through the paper line by line, figure by figure," said Begley. "I explained that we re-did their experiment 50 times and never got their result. He said they'd done it six times and got this result once, but put it in the paper because it made the best story. It's very disillusioning."
Such selective publication is just one reason the scientific literature is peppered with incorrect results. Quote.


Of course these attention grabbing stories have sold millions of newspapers and helped TV ad revenue.! And they remain a fabulous cash-cow for all involved, - including research facilities!

But... with Alternative Cancer Treatments...All Proof of Success Gets Mocked... and Thrown in the Trash Can! No matter how great the results might be.

Here's proof that people at the top deny any success and refuse to publish results and data from doctors employing alternative treatments that CONTRADICT their chosen paradigm, even if and when supported by somebody who has great status in medical circles.

Dr William Kelly was a dentist who cured his own pancreatic cancer, (usually terminal of course), and inspired by this, treated many others successfully with his system. When the results of his work were investigated, the results were staggering, with a very high success rate that far exceeded chemotherapy.

Kelley Treatment: The Cancer Treatment So Successful - Traditional Doctors SHUT It Down

New York City physician and cancer specialist Dr. Nick Gonzalez has had remarkable success treating some of the most difficult to treat cancer patients using his three-pronged nutritional approach; for example, pancreatic cancer patients treated by Dr. Gonzalez have survived for two to five years, as compared to similar patients receiving chemotherapy, who typically do not survive beyond 18 months

He didn't set out to treat cancer at first, let alone treat patients. His original plan was to be a basic science researcher at Sloan-Kettering, a teaching hospital for Cornell Medical College. He had a chance meeting with William Kelley, a controversial dentist who was one of the founders of nutritional typing. Dr. Kelley had been practicing alternative and nutritional approaches for over two decades at the time, leading him to begin a student project investigation of Kelley's work in the summer of 1981.

"I started going through his records and even though I was just a second year medical student, I could see right away there were cases that were extraordinary," he says. "Patients with appropriately diagnosed pancreatic cancer, metastatic breast cancer in the bone, metastatic colorectal cancer... who were alive 5, 10, 15 years later under Kelley's care with a nutritional approach." 

Dr Mercola

The Problem with Trials

The big problem with trials relating to alternative cancer treatments, is that the people ultimately carrying out the investigation are the very people who stand to lose billions if successful! On top of that, everything they stand for will be shown to be an epic failure.

If you wonder how mainstream medicine got so ignorant of the healthy healing power of proper nutrition, supplements, -  and dealing with the causes of disease, instead of just treating symptoms, read on.

This is a great article I recently read by Tony Isaacs which will explain to you briefly exactly how the medical system in this country (and other "civilized" countries) was corrupted by monied interests in the early 1900's and remains so today..

(NaturalNews) Three fateful actions dating back over 100 years ago ultimately led to today's mainstream model of medicine: Treating the body as a collection of parts instead of treating and nurturing the whole body; treating illness by managing symptoms with unnatural drug compounds; and ignoring and suppressing safer and more effective natural health and healing. As a result, millions of lives have been lost and many millions more have suffered needlessly.

How Mainstream medicine Lost the Plot...

More Corruption Exposed...

"Last week, Chinese security authorities reported that GSK executives admitted to funnelling bribes to Chinese doctors and officials through 700 travel agencies and consultancies over six years. The Guizhou man's experience illustrates the ubiquity of such malfeasance in China's healthcare system – and the widespread outrage that it's caused...."

Admission of Failure: (Nature Journal)
Even the prestigious journal NATURE.COM admits to huge failings...

Some quotes from:

Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research

"Efforts over the past decade to characterize the genetic alterations in human cancers have led to a better understanding of molecular drivers of this complex set of diseases. Although we in the cancer field hoped that this would lead to more effective drugs, historically, our ability to translate cancer research to clinical success has been remarkably low...."

this low success rate is not sustainable or acceptable, and investigators must reassess their approach to translating discovery research into greater clinical success and impact."

"Many factors are responsible for the high failure rate, notwithstanding the inherently difficult nature of this disease. Certainly, the limitations of preclinical tools such as inadequate cancer-cell-line and mouse models2 make it difficult for even the best scientists working in optimal conditions to make a discovery that will ultimately have an impact in the clinic.

"Issues related to clinical-trial design — such as uncontrolled phase II studies, a reliance on standard criteria for evaluating tumour response and the challenges of selecting patients prospectively — also play a significant part in the dismal success rate."

"More troubling, some of the research has triggered a series of clinical studies — suggesting that many patients had subjected themselves to a trial of a regimen or agent that probably wouldn't work.
These results, although disturbing, do not mean that the entire system is flawed."

Well that's a relief!! (Full Nature article)

If you read the papers, you could be forgiven for imagining that Othodox cancer treatment was on the brink of a huge breakthrough. They have maintained this BIG LIE for decades. It guarantees funding for everyone concerned...including Universities. Yet the facts on the ground show a ver different story. The skills employed by the press release department  are remarkable, and worth every million spent.