"Cancer's Toxic Ineffective Conventional Treatments" - an excerpt from the cancer report  "Cancer Truth, Prevention, & Natural Treatments" based on the latest research.

The report is available for viewing or download on the cancer page.

CANCER'S TOXIC INEFFECTIVE CONVENTIONAL TREATMENTS

For decades, the cancer establishment has used the conventional cancer therapies of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy, also known in the natural healing community as 'cut, burn, and poison' therapies, for the treatment of cancer. The cancer industry claims these primitive therapies save lives, boost long-term survival rates, and do not damage healthy cells. All these statements by the cancer industry are false. These therapies are very toxic and ineffective, but hugely profitable for the conventional medical field. Misinformed by narrow-minded, conventionally-trained physicians, most cancer patients are told their only option is surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation. Millions of people needlessly die of cancer each year because they cling to the myth and mistaken belief that their oncologist (cancer doctor) and the chemotherapy and radiation treatments will cure them of cancer, when in fact, the evidence is abundantly clear that they are the worst possible choice to treat cancer because they have the lowest track record of success among all cancer therapies. Most patients administered chemotherapy die within a few years of treatment either from secondary cancers or weak immunity as a direct consequence of the treatment. Chemotherapy and radiation combined are the leading cause of secondary cancers worldwide. Worst yet is the long-term, negative impact on the patient's quality of life due to poor health and cognitive function after receiving this toxic treatment.

The official guideline in conventional cancer treatment for what is considered a 'cured' cancer patient is this: if the treated patient lives for five years then he is considered cured and the treatment successful. So if a patient dies of cancer or its complications just one day after the five year anniversary date, he is still statistically considered as a successful cure. This five year benchmark allows doctors to advertise to their new cancer patients these patented, expensive, toxic treatments as being fairly successful, which is deceptive and not true for longterm success rates. A study completed in 1993 by epidemiologist and biostatistician Ulrich Abel found that the overall success rate for most cancers treated with standard allopathic conventional treatment (chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery) was just 4%. In other words, statistically averaged, 96% of cancer patients treated conventionally died of cancer or from complications related to their treatment. The only group of cancers treated conventionally that had a higher average were some blood cancers such as leukemia or Hodgkins which approached a 35% success rate. But according to Dr. John Diamond, M.D., a study of over 10,000 patients showed clearly that chemotherapy's supposedly strong track record with Hodgkin’s disease (lymphoma) is also actually a lie. Patients who underwent chemotherapy were 14 times more likely to develop leukemia and 6 times more likely to develop cancers of the bones, joints, and soft tissues than those patients who did not undergo chemotherapy. Most patients who are administered chemotherapy die within 15 years of treatment either from secondary cancers, or a compromised immunity as a direct consequence of the treatment. Chemotherapy and radiation combined are the leading cause of secondary cancers worldwide. There has been a large increase in the use of chemotherapy drugs since 2003 and despite the massive increase in the incidence of cancer since then, the risk factors of cancer treatment or cancer diagnostics are not mentioned by the cancer industry as a cause of any primary or secondary cancers. In clinical studies, the manufacturers always compare the new drugs with older toxic drugs. There are no control groups that are given no treatment at all. So in order to be allowed onto the market, the new toxic drug must achieve a statistically significant advantage in one small group of chosen test subjects vs. those treated with some already approved toxic drug.

In regards to surgery, many studies have shown that some cancer cells are left behind in 25 to 60 percent of patients, allowing malignant growths to recur. Surgery itself is often responsible for the spread of the cancer, according to many physicians. A microscopic miscue or careless manipulation of tumor tissue by the surgeon can spill literally millions of cancer cells into the bloodstream. Surgical biopsy, a procedure used to detect early-stage cancer, can also contribute to the spread of cancer. Often while making a biopsy the malignant tumor is cut across, which tends to spread or accelerate the growth. Needle biopsies can also accomplish the same tragic results. Surgery also weakens immunity, causes great systemic stress on the patient, and can cause sudden death. Many cancer patients have died on the operating table, or shortly after leaving it, from complications of surgery. Some surgical operations are performed needlessly. Pain, disfigurement, and restriction of function often accompany surgery. Many cancer patients are left debilitated, crippled, and traumatized. For all these reasons, cutting up the body is not the answer to cancer.

Radiation therapy, like chemotherapy, also damages healthy cells and increases the risk of developing cancer in most people because it is a carcinogen (cancer-causing). The types of cancers linked to radiation therapy are vast, but primarily consist of leukemia and sarcomas. These cases typically develop a few years after radiation exposure with the peak of risk being about five to nine years after exposure. Again, most patients that pursue radiation therapy develop secondary cancers related to treatment and not as a consequence of the original cancer. Radiation-induced cancers have exploded in the past two decades ever since radiation has proliferated as a treatment, usually secondary to chemotherapy. Some other cancer risks are tied to radiation therapy, as well. Solid tumors can develop at or near the site of the radiation exposure even ten or more years after the radiation therapy. These risks seem to be greatest in certain areas of the body, such as the breast and the thyroid. In some of these cases, your age at the time of radiation treatment plays a role. For example, younger breast cancer patients are more likely to develop a second cancer from radiation therapy than older breast cancer patients. Radiation severely depresses immunity and can cause serious chromosomal DNA damage at both diagnostic and therapeutic-dose levels. Radiation can permanently stunt growth in children. Its other side effects includes nausea, vomiting, excessive weakness and fatigue, sores or ulcers in the mouth, throat, intestines, genitals, and other parts of the body, temporary or permanent hair loss, extensive burns on the skin and mucous membranes, ulcers, bone death, swelling of tumors, and other harmful side effects.

Chemotherapy has a number of post-treatment adverse effects. Most chemotherapeutic agents enter the brain and they can directly and indirectly produce a number of acute and delayed changes to the central nervous system. These effects can last for years, then dissipate, or, when they occur in young children, can continue into adulthood. Common side effects include the well-known: nausea, hair loss, diarrhea, vomiting, fever, pain and fatigue. More long term and later developing side effects, however, can be far more serious, and include: lung damage, heart problems, nerve damage, kidney problems, infertility, risk of more incidents of cancer and chemo brain (cognitive dysfunction). The long-term survival rates of chemotherapy patients are grossly exaggerated because most of these patients end up dying of diseases unrelated to the original cancer itself, but instead related to the treatment. Chemotherapy drugs, especially alkylating agents, are known to cause other cancers including leukemia. Alkylating agents directly damage the DNA of all cells. These agents are not phase-specific meaning they work in all phases of the cell cycle. Because these drugs damage DNA, they can cause long-term damage to the bone marrow and consequently affect long-term immunity. With these drugs, the risk for a second cancer develops slowly over time. Studies have shown that the risk begins to rise about two years after treatment, is highest about five to ten years after treatment. It’s the reason most chemotherapy patients die 10-15 years after treatment. According to a new study recently published in the peer-reviewed journal Nature, chemotherapy not only promotes the growth and spread of cancer cells by damaging the healthy tissue that surrounds tumors, but it also causes cancer cells to develop full-on resistance to the popular treatment, morphing them into super cancer cells. Researchers from the Fred Hutchison Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington, learned this after observing the effects of chemotherapy on healthy cell tissue. They discovered that chemotherapy, which is a recognized poison, damages the DNA of healthy, non-cancerous cells, causing them to produce molecules that in turn produce more cancer cells. The researchers found that chemotherapy can cause fibroblasts (cell DNA) to increase production of a molecule called WNT16B by 30-fold in tissues surrounding a tumor according to the group Cancer Research U.K. in a recent report on the study. It adds that this then helps cancer cells to grow, invade neighboring cells, and resist chemotherapy. The same team found that another major side effect of chemotherapy is cancer cells grow more virulent than they were before the treatment. Like superbugs and super weeds, which develop resistance in response to conventional drug therapies and chemical spraying respectively, these super cancer cells no longer respond even to the most aggressive forms of chemotherapy, which means cancer itself is becoming more deadly. In other words, healthy cells damaged by chemotherapy secreted more of a protein which boosts cancer cell survival and also resist subsequent therapy. The researchers said they confirmed their findings with breast and ovarian cancer tumors. Thus chemotherapy has shown to boost cancer growth and be a major cause of cancer, not a cure for it, and a leading cause of secondary cancers. Rates of tumor cell reproduction have shown to accelerate between treatments. Tumors may respond well initially, but are followed by rapid re-growth and resistance to further chemotherapy treatment.

These mainstream treatments that either cut, burn or poison away the tumors and cancer cells, damage the central nervous system, organ systems, and the immune system even years after the treatment has finished, resulting in the return of the primary cancer or the development of secondary cancers. Chemotherapy and radiation also cause healthy brain cells to die leading to cognitive problems long after treatment has ended, an effect known as “chemo brain” where the treated patients' memory, learning, and concentration is impaired. In addition to this, these treatments don't cure or resolve the underlying causes of cancer- nutritional deficiencies and/or toxic lifestyles and environments. Conventional treatments are only managing symptoms, not the root cause of the cancer itself, while damaging the body's organs, weakening the immune system, and impairing cognitive functions.

Here are some quotes from prominent cancer authors, physicians, and specialists about the dangers of conventional treatment of cancer:

"My studies have proved conclusively that untreated cancer victims live up to four times longer than treated individuals. If one has cancer and opts to do nothing at all, he will live longer and feel better than if he undergoes radiation, chemotherapy or surgery. For a typical type of cancer, people who refused treatment lived for an average of 12-1/2 years. Those who accepted surgery or other kinds of treatment like chemotherapy and radiation lived an average of only three years. I attribute this to the traumatic effect of surgery and these treatments on the body's natural defense mechanism. The body has a natural defense against every type of cancer."

-Dr. Hardin Jones, one of the nation's top statisticians in the field of cancer, professor of medical physics and physiology at the University of California, Berkeley, in his presentation to the American Cancer Society. He surveyed global cancer of all types, spent years analyzing clinical records, and compared the untreated and the treated concluding that the untreated outlives the treated, both in terms of quality and in terms of quantity.

"Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon, or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade, yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumors. Despite the fact that most physicians agree that chemotherapy is largely ineffective, they are coerced into using it by special interest groups which have vested interest in the profits of the drug industry."

-Dr. Allen Levin, M.D., professor of immunology at the University of California at San Francisco Medical School, in his book 'The Healing of Cancer'.

“As a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incomprehensible to me that physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good.”

-Dr. Alan C. Nixon, past president of the American Chemical Society.

"If I contracted cancer, I would never go to a standard cancer treatment center. Only cancer victims who live far from such centers have a chance.”

-Dr. Charles Mathe, French cancer specialist

"Keep in mind that the 5 year mark is still used as the official guideline for "cure" by mainstream oncologists. Statistically, the 5 year cure makes chemotherapy look good for certain kinds of cancer, but when you follow cancer patients beyond 5 years, the reality often shifts in a dramatic way."

-Dr. John Diamond, M.D.

"2% to 4% of cancers respond to chemotherapy. If you can shrink the tumor 50% or more for 28 days you have got the FDA's definition of an active drug. That is called a response rate, so you have a response but when you look to see if there is any life prolongation from taking this treatment what you find is all kinds of hocus pocus and song and dance about the disease free survival, and this and that. In the end there is no proof that chemotherapy in the vast majority of cases actually extends life, and this is the GREAT LIE about chemotherapy, that somehow there is a correlation between shrinking a tumor and extending the life of the patient."

-Ralph Moss, Ph.D. ,author of 'Questioning Chemotherapy'

"Percentage of cancer patients whose lives are predictably saved by chemotherapy - 3%

Conclusive evidence (majority of cancers) that chemotherapy has any positive influence on survival or quality of life - 0%

Percentage of oncologists who said if they had cancer they would not participate in chemotherapy trials due to its ineffectiveness and its unacceptable toxicity -75%

Percentage of people with cancer in the U.S. who receive chemotherapy - 75%"

-John Robbins from 'Reclaiming Our Health: Exploding the Medical Myth and Embracing the Source of True Healing'

"In the matter of duration of malignant tumors before treatment, no studies have established the much talked about relationship between early detection and favorable survival after treatment. Serious attempts to relate prompt treatment with chance of cure have been unsuccessful. In some types of cancer, the opposite of the expected association of short duration of symptoms with a high chance of being "cured" has been observed. A long duration of symptoms before treatment in a few cancers of the breast and cervix is associated with longer than usual survival. Neither the timing nor the extent of treatment of the true malignancies has appreciably altered the average course of the disease. The possibility exists that treatment makes the average situation worse."

-Dr. Hardin Jones, one of the nation's top statisticians in the field of cancer, professor of medical physics and physiology at the University of California, Berkeley, in his presentation to the American Cancer Society. He states that early diagnosis and treatment of cancer does NOT improve the chances of survival. One of the most publicized claims by The American Cancer Society is that early diagnosis and treatment increases the chance of survival. This is one of those slogans that drives millions of people into their doctors' offices for the annual checkup. It's a big revenue to the cancer industry but its medical value is not as proven as the hype would suggest.

 "In regard to surgery, no relationship between intensity of surgical treatment and duration of survival has been found in verified malignancies. On the contrary, simple excision of cancers has produced essentially the same survival as radical excision and dissection of the lymphatic drainage. "

-Dr. Hardin Jones, one of the nation's top statisticians in the field of cancer, professor of medical physics and physiology at the University of California, Berkeley, in his presentation to the American Cancer Society, in regards to surgery statistics.

"The majority of publications equate the effect of chemotherapy with tumor response, irrespective of survival. Many oncologists take it for granted that response to therapy prolongs survival, an opinion which is based on a fallacy and which is not supported by clinical studies. To date there is no clear evidence that the treated patients, as a whole, benefit from chemotherapy as to their quality of life."

-Dr. Ulrich Abel

"Many cancers are benign and will not metastasize until they are hit with chemotherapy. In other words, many people who've been diagnosed with metastatic cancer did not have metastatic cancer until they got their chemotherapy."

-Irwin Bross, a biostatistician for the National Cancer Institute

"I look upon cancer in the same way that I look upon heart disease, arthritis, high blood pressure, or even obesity, for that matter, in that by dramatically strengthening the body's immune system through diet, nutritional supplements, and exercise, the body can rid itself of the cancer, just as it does in other degenerative diseases. Consequently, I wouldn't have chemotherapy and radiation because I'm not interested in therapies that cripple the immune system, and, in my opinion, virtually ensure failure for the majority of cancer patients."

-Dr Julian Whitaker, M.D.

"He said, "I'm giving cancer patients over here at this major cancer clinic drugs that are killing them, and I can't stop it because they say the protocol is what's important." And I say, "But the patient's not doing well." They say, "The protocol's what's important, not the patient." And he said, "You can't believe what goes on in the name of medicine and science in this country."

-Author Gary Null

And according to cancer leading authority and author Dr. Ralph W. Moss's book 'Questioning Chemotherapy', a critique of toxic drugs in the treatment of cancer; From John Hopkins University:

1. Every person has cancer cells in the body. These cancer cells do not show up in the standard tests until they have multiplied to a few billion. When doctors tell cancer patients that there are no more cancer cells in their bodies after treatment, it just means the tests are unable to detect the cancer cells because they have not reached the detectable size. In fact, everyone has cancer cells forming all the time. But normally their immune system kills the cancer cells fast enough that a person is never diagnosed with cancer. But when the immune system becomes weak, the cancer cells can grow out of control.

2. Cancer cells occur between 6 to more than 10 times in a person's lifetime

3. When the person's immune system is strong the cancer cells will be destroyed and prevented from multiplying and forming tumors.

4. When a person has cancer it indicates the person has multiple nutritional deficiencies. These could be due to genetic, environmental, food, and lifestyle factors.

5. To overcome the multiple nutritional deficiencies, changing diet and including supplements will strengthen the immune system.

6. Chemotherapy involves poisoning the rapidly-growing cancer cells and also destroys rapidly-growing healthy cells in the bone marrow, gastro-intestinal tract etc, and can cause organ damage, like liver, kidneys, heart, lungs etc.

7. Radiation, while destroying cancer cells, also burns, scars and damages healthy cells, tissues and organs.

8. Initial treatment with chemotherapy and radiation will often reduce tumor size. However prolonged use of chemotherapy and radiation do not result in more tumor destruction.

9. When the body has too much toxic burden from chemotherapy and radiation, the immune system is either compromised or destroyed, hence the person can succumb to various kinds of infections and complications.

10. Chemotherapy and radiation can cause cancer cells to mutate and become resistant and difficult to destroy. Surgery can also cause cancer cells to spread to other sites.

---------------

"Cancer's Profit Driven Industry" - an excerpt from the cancer report  "Cancer Truth, Prevention, & Natural Treatments" based on the latest research.

The report is available for viewing or download on the cancer page.

CANCER'S PROFIT-DRIVEN INDUSTRY

             The reported spending on cancer treatment in 2012 in the United States alone was 124.6 billion dollars, approximately 2 percent of its gross national product. In the US, cancer is the most expensive per person illness to treat. The drugs alone can cost a patient over $100,000 per year, in addition to the enormous costs for radiation, chemotherapy, and physicians bills. An estimated 80 million people in the US don't have sufficient health insurance to cover the costs of a catastrophic illness such as cancer, so many people go broke, suffer horribly, and die. Cancer is a multi-billion dollar industry and big business that represents huge profits to the pharmaceutical companies and the health industry. Those who are profiting have great financial interest in seeing the deadly trend continue to increase. They do not have a vested interest in prevention or finding a cure because there is little profit in eradicating the disease. A great deal of research is covered up and many potential cures are ignored and discredited because there is far more money in perpetuating cancer than in curing it. Natural remedies cannot be patented. There are a number of alternative healing therapies that are very inexpensive and effective compared to patented, expensive conventional treatments, but organized medicine, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and their controllers in the pharmaceutical industry do not want the public to know about them. The reason is obvious: alternative, non-toxic therapies represent a potential loss of billions of dollars to the pharmaceutical drug companies.

The pharmaceutical industry has collectively engaged in a medical conspiracy for the past 70 years to influence legislative bodies on both the state and federal level to create regulations that promote the use of drug medicine, while simultaneously creating restrictive, controlling mechanisms like licensing and government approval designed to limit the availability of non-drug, alternative healing treatments. The conspiracy to limit and eliminate competition from non-drug therapies began with the Flexner Report of 1910. Abraham Flexner was hired by oil and business magnate John D. Rockefeller to evaluate the effectiveness of therapies taught in medical schools and other institutions of the healing arts all over the US. Rockefeller wanted to dominate control over the oil, chemical, and pharmaceutical industry. He arranged for his company, Standard Oil of New Jersey to obtain a controlling interest in a huge German drug cartel called I. G. Farben. He pulled in his stronger competitors like Andrew Carnegie and JP Morgan as partners, while making other, less powerful players, stockholders in Standard Oil. Those who refused to cooperate were eliminated according to Rockefeller biographer David W. Hoffman in "Report on a Rockefeller". The report Flexner submitted to The Carnegie Foundation was titled "Medical Education in the United States and Canada" and recommended appointing a medical school or healing institution "doorkeeper". It was decided that the American Medical Association (AMA) would be the "doorkeeper", and it was empowered to certify or de-certify any medical school in the country on the grounds of whether that school met the AMA's standards of approved medicine. The AMA came into existence in 1847. It is a private organization of allopathic physicians which serves the interests of its members, especially when it comes to influencing favorable legislation. It functions in every sense of the word as a union, although its members wear white collars instead of blue. Flexner decided that any discipline that didn't use drugs to help cure the patient was deceptive and a fraud. Medical schools that offered courses in bioelectric medicine, homeopathy, or Eastern medicine, for example, were told to either drop these courses from their curriculum or lose their accreditation and underwriting support. A few schools resisted for a time, but eventually most schools cooperated or were closed down. A similar scenario was played out in Canada. It was attempted in England against homeopathy, but it failed due to the personal intervention of the royal family who had received much relief and healing at the hands of homeopathic healers in the 19th century. The total number of medical schools in the United States went from 160 in 1906 (before the Flexner Report) to 85 in 1920 and further down to 69 schools in 1944. Due to the Rockefeller Foundation, Carnegie Foundation, and the Flexner Report, only 30 medical schools in the United States require their students to take a course in nutrition. The AMA began removing nutritional education from medical schools in the US almost a century ago. The average US physician, after four years of medical training, receives only 2.5 hours of nutritional education. Bottom line is doctors can't cure cancer because they've been kept ignorant by the controlling interests of medicine and pharmacology. Medical doctors no longer understand anything about using food as medicine or are even allowed to suggest it. All mid-wives, Native American herbalists, and natural healers would be referred to in medical journals as "quacks." The western medicine philosophy would soon come to be that no food in the world could ever heal a human being or cure any disease or disorder; in fact, only pharmaceuticals and vaccines would ever be able to make that claim legally and get away with it, whether in peer reviews, medical and science journals, scientific studies, or labeled as such on products. Currently, it is illegal for any food, herb, tincture or superfood product to say that it cures anything or else it faces heavy fines or serious jail time. Yet medications advertised on TV since 1997 in the US can say they treat all kinds of diseases and disorders, even though the side effects are horrendous, sometimes including internal bleeding and suicide. In 2002, the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that in the previous year, the average oncologist (cancer doctor) had made $253,000 of which 75% was profit on chemotherapy drugs administered in his/her office. Surveys of oncologists by the Los Angeles Times and the McGill Cancer Center in Montreal show that from 75% to 91% of oncologists would refuse chemotherapy as a treatment for themselves or their families because it is too toxic and ineffective. Yet, 75% of cancer patients today are urged to do the chemotherapy treatment by their oncologists. The medical establishment works closely with the drug multinationals whose main objective is profits, and who does not want an epidemic of good health. Lots of drugs must be sold and to achieve this, anything goes: lies, fraud, and kickbacks. Doctors are the principal salespeople of the drug companies. They are rewarded with research grants, gifts, and lavish perks. The authorities forbid natural alternative medicine because they are serving the industry, and the industry cannot make money with herbs, vitamins, and homeopathy. They cannot patent natural remedies. That is why they push synthetic medicines. They control medicine, and that is why they are able to tell medical schools what they can and cannot teach. They have their own sets of laws, and they force people into them. It costs millions to fund research and clinical trials needed to produce a new drug that can be patented and sold. These drugs create more illness, have serious side effects, and only treat the symptoms rather than the true underlying root cause of the illness. Managing the disease symptoms is done to keep patients coming back for more of their expensive treatments while draining their medical insurance coverage, bank account, and savings in the process. It has been said that the key to success in the conventional health business is to pull off the trick of making people patients for life!

Over the past decades, hundreds of caring, concerned, and conscientious alternative healers have been jailed and abused like common criminals, for the so called crime of curing people of life-threatening diseases in an "unapproved" manner, by heavy-handed government agents who raid these non-drug alternative clinics. In the US, a relentless campaign of misinformation, fraud, deception, and suppression of alternative therapies and healers has been in place for most of this century in order to keep highly effective alternative therapies from reaching any significant level of public awareness. Control is exerted through propaganda from pro-establishment organizations like the American Medical Association (AMA), the non-profit American Cancer Society (ACS), the Diabetes Foundation; local medical boards; and government agencies like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institute of Health (NIH), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Academy of Science, and with the full cooperation of the corporate-controlled mainstream media. John D. Rockefeller, Jr., the son of the founder of the pharmaceutical industry in America, founded the American Cancer Society (ACS) in 1913.The cancer establishment policies, particularly those of the ACS, are strongly influenced by extensive conflicts of interest with the pharmaceutical industry. And the NCI, with support from the ACS, has effectively blocked funding for research and clinical trials on promising non-toxic alternative cancer drugs for decades, in favor of highly toxic and largely ineffective patented drugs developed by the multibillion dollar global cancer drug industry. As admitted by former NCI director Samuel Broder, the NCI has become what amounts to a governmental pharmaceutical company. Additionally, the cancer establishment has systematically harassed the proponents of non-toxic alternative cancer drugs. As reported in The Chronicle of Philanthropy, the ACS is more interested in accumulating wealth than saving lives. Furthermore, it is the only known charity that makes contributions to political parties. In addition to this, the ACS and NCI have failed to provide Congress and regulatory agencies like the FDA and EPA with available scientific information on a wide range of exposures to avoidable carcinogens (cancer-causing substances) in food, air, water, the workplace, consumer products, cosmetics, body-care products, and household products. As a result, corrective legislative and regulatory action has not been taken. That in spite of billions of dollars in expenditures since the "war against cancer" was launched by President Nixon in 1971. Since then, there has been little if any significant improvement in treatment and survival rates for most common cancers in spite of contrary misleading hype by the cancer establishment. Governmental protection agencies like the FDA or the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have proven repeatedly that their purpose is to serve the interests of pharmaceutical companies and corporate interests, not their citizens’ interests. Vaccines, pharmaceuticals, diagnostics and therapies, dentistry, psychiatry and practically all medical research is an industry and driver of corporate profits. The cancer industry is particularly ironic because the toxic consumer products that cause many cancers are made by divisions of the same multinational corporations whose subsidiaries make the scanners and equipment used to diagnose cancers, and the chemotherapy drugs used to treat it. A few examples of the common conflicts of interest in the industry as stated in John Robbins book "Reclaiming Our Health: Exploding the Medical Myth and Embracing the Source of True Healing":

-John S. Reed, chairman and board member of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, the world's oldest and largest private cancer treatment and research center, is also director of Philip Morris, the tobacco company, and of Monsanto, the multinational chemical and agricultural biotech company that is a leading producer of toxic chemical products, pesticides, and GMOs (genetically modified organisms) which are strongly linked to causing cancer.;

-Richard L. Gelb, vice chairman and board member of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, is also chairman of the board of Bristol-Meyers, the company that accounts for half of the chemotherapy drug sales in the world;

-Samuel Broder, executive director of the government agency National Cancer Institute NCI until 1995, is also director of Ivax, a prominent chemotherapy company.

Many prominent physicians and authors continue to speak out against the cancer industry. Robert Atkins, M.D. states: "There is not one, but many cures for cancer available. But they are all being systematically suppressed by the American Cancer Society, the National Cancer Institute, and the major oncology centers. They have too much of an interest in the status quo" and Dr John Diamond, M.D. states: "Finding a cure for cancer is absolutely contraindicated by the profits of the cancer industry’s chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery cash trough" and Dr. Glenn Warner, one of the most highly qualified cancer specialists in the US, states: “We have a multi-billion dollar industry that is killing people, right and left, just for financial gain. Their idea of research is to see whether two doses of this poison is better than three doses of that poison.” The bottom line is that the healthcare and cancer industry is big business driven by profits only, and not by public health concerns.

--------