cancer patients were subjected to a barrage of cutting-edge medical treatments - surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy, etc. What are these? As in casino gambling - many people will try to meet, and a victory, but many more lost. At the end of the day, the winner of the establishment! Do not get me wrong. "Business" of cancer treatment does not produce a winner. Some current methods of treatment are very useful for saving lives. However, some treatments are often only directly dangerous, if we care to see or know what really happened.
review of medical literature seems to suggest that chemotherapy - the use of cytotoxic drugs to kill cancer cells in the body, it seems that many authors have "Buchanan", while others feel that they are not effective at all.
popular magazine in Germany, Der Spiegel on 4 October 2004, an article entitled: ". Useless toxic drugs", "ohne Giftkur Nutzen" translated as the article stated that "the increasingly sophisticated and expensive cellular poisons, they get seriously ill patients ... patients do not actually live one day longer. "
Wolfgang Wrasidlo, director of drug development, Scripps Clinic, La Jolla, California, was quoted as saying: "Everyone knows that our current cancer drugs bad ."
Barry Sears, author of Enter the Zone wrote: "The existing treatments for cancer are probably barbaric in modern medicine ."
Dr. Jeffrey Tobias, clinical director of the Meyerstein Institute of Oncology, Great Britain, (in the book: Cancer) said: "It is ... surprising how often the rule: first do no harm is ignored." Sometimes oncologists use chemotherapy indiscriminately with "no justification, other than physicians desire to do something." Such a remark is really disturbing. Does this mean that in the past or even now, chemotherapy is used in patients without a difference?
Dr Urich Abel, a prominent German professor at the University of Heidelberg, he concluded that:
(in Der Spiegel 33:174-176 1990.) "For most of today's common solid cancers, the ones that cause 90% of cancer deaths each year - breast, lung, colon, rectum, skin, liver, pancreas and bladder - Chemotherapy never been proven to be good at all ."
Dr. Ralph Moss, fired from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center to tell the truth, has written books and numerous articles on chemotherapy - for example, Questioning Chemotherapy, cancer industry, etc. According to Dr. Moss, "Chemotherapy is usually does not cure cancer or prolong life. it does not improve the quality of life of the patient either. On the contrary to be "greatly reduce the quality of life ."
Albert Braverman, Professor of Oncology at the State University of New York, USA, wrote: "Many medical oncologists recommend chemotherapy for virtually any tumor, with the hope undiscouraged almost invariable failure" (Lancet, April 1991.337: 901) .
Johan Bjorksten of the University of Wisconsin, USA, wrote: "Chemotherapy alone destroys the immune system beyond the point ... which increases the risk of early death from infection and other cancers in these immune naked people." (in J. Bjorksten, blow Pulb., 1978, pg. 22, Charleston, SC ).
Dr. Richard Evans (in his book: Cancer breakthrough you've never heard of) he wrote: "Patients should understand that chemotherapy has little benefit for solid tumors ... Every year thousands of people endure the toxic side effects and ... to receive. little, if any, used ."
Dr. W. John Diamond & Associates, writing about the conventional treatment for cancer, said: ". The so-called success of conventional cancer treatment is often just an illusion There is no conclusive evidence ... or data demonstrating long-term successful results or reasonable rates of remission to support these practices ."
Dr. John Lee & Associates has written (in his book: What your doctor can not tell you about breast cancer), "Some chemotherapy does not prolong life for several months, but in general the high cost of the devastating side effects of chemotherapy is the use of . just gamble ... sometimes it works, sometimes not, sometimes it makes things worse ."
In light of the above comments of various experts feel that cancer patients should be strengthened. In the name of fairness, I feel that anyone who has to undergo any invasive treatment procedures like chemotherapy must be provided with sufficient information and honest, so you will be able to decide for themselves what is best for him. Unfortunately, many patients who came to see us remain ignorant or very aware of what they were for - the card did not pass for them. Sometimes they are even wrong.
No disrespect to any person or profession, I must point out that a much-needed step to take is to seek the truth about the current treatments for cancer. Let us study all available and let us take these questions and find an honest, unbiased answers. For all surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy (other drugs), which were conducted in patients:
1 How many patients are cured?
2 How are the benefits of treatment?
3 What are the benefits and at what cost?
4 How many died?
5 How to survive one, two, three, five or ten years after treatment?
6 How siffered metastases to the liver, bones, lungs, etc.?
7 Is there a relationship between treatment received and metastases that have occurred?
Unfortunately, these answers remain elusive, and not in print. Strategies to remain profitable in this cancer-treatment-business is to be non-committal as to the actual facts - to be as vague and ambiguous as possible to set up a false front, "I-know-all" picture.
"Your patients do not ask too many questions. I am the one who know best, and you just follow my commandments ."
Let me end on this quote:
"None so blind as those who have eyes and not see the
and none so deaf as those who have ears and hear not ."
