Cancer

** 10/11 "Healing Cancer from the Inside Out", alternative methods for curing cancer, and facts on the crooked FDA, American Cancer Society, and other pharmeceutical companies

"We have a multi billion dollar industry that is killing people, right and left, just for financial gain"-Glenn Warner, M.D.
I just watched a documentary written by Mike Anderson called, "Healing Cancer from the Inside Out".  I highly recommend this documentary.  It made me furious with the American Cancer Society. I will never do another race that supports them again.  Here are my notes from this documentary.

The treatment of cancer and degenerative diseases is a national scandal.   How can the cancer industry get away with such ineffective treatments with such pathetic results? One, conventional treatment is the only game in town. Two, massive sums of money are at stake for the medical/pharmeceutical industry. Corporate medicine won't allow a cure to cancer.
We live with cancer.  We get cancer cells in our bodies everyday. It takes 4 to 10 billion cancer cells in our body before mammography ever detects it (and they say this is early detection?) Cancer is a slow growing disease.  It can take 10 years before it emerges as a tumor, then the doctors pressure you to start radiation or chemotherapy.  A tumor is a sign that something else is wrong in your body.  In conventional medicine, doctors only focus on amphutating parts of us, but never fix the actual problem. Conventional treatment makes a bad situation worse.

A bad gene is not active if the right conditions in our bodies exist. The gene doesn't have to manifest itself if you have the right lifestyle. Nutrients control the expression of genes. A good diet multiplies immune cells.

Chemotherapy greatly increases a reoccurence of cancer.  It devastates the immune system so much that cancer patients have died of the common cold.
If an IV bag is filled its classified as a major biohazard, but we inject this into our bodies to be cured, and the FDA says it's safe and effective. VP Hubert Humphrey described chemo as "bottled death", before he died of bladder cancer.

The cancer industry claims a cure is "still breathing 5 years after diagnosis." They have deceptively increased the 5 year cure rates through early detection, but have not made a dent in long term survival rates.  So, in 6 years, if you still have cancer, but you're breathing, you're "cured". If you live with AIDS for 5 years you're not said to be cured of AIDS, so why are you cured of cancer?

The percentage of Americans dying from cancer is about the same now as in 1970, and even 1950. Long term survival for advanced cancer has barely budged since the 1970s (Forture Magazine).

Untreated patients live as long or longer than treated ones because their bodies are not poisoned with chemicals. Chemo never kills all cancer cells resistant cells feed off of chemo.  You cannot heal with poison.

. "Everyone should know the war on cancer is largely a fraud and the National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer Society are derelict in their duties to the people who support them"-Linus Pauling, Ph.D. Nobel Prize Winner.

The American Cancer Society is the wealthiest nonprofit in the world.  Most of the money goes to overhead, what's left goes to research that benefits pharmaceutical and radiological companies.  5 presidents of the ACS have been radiologists. Some issues the ACS has opposed are:

-Refused to support a ban on DES, which caused vaginal cancers.
-Opposed regulating hair products know to cause breast cancers.
-Opposted saccharin and advocates its use.
-Repeatedly failed to support the Clean Air Act.
-Campaigned against laws that ban food addictives shown to be carcinogenic in either animals or humans.
-Supported the pesticide industry stating pesticide residues are safe, even for babies.
-Refused to support legislation to label all toxic chemicals in cosmetics.

Board members on the ACS include herbicide, pesticide, and chemical fertilizer manufacters.
The FDA is largely controlled by the orthodox medical profession and the industries which the FDA was set up to regulate. The FDA is serving the industry rather than the public.  Natural therapies can't be patented, so they are not profitable.  Early detection is a profit maker.

Animal protein is the strongest carcinogen.  Casein (found in dairy, mainly cheese,) is the most aggressive cancer promoter. Nutrients found in plant foods shrink tumors. Animal foods made tumors larger. Animal protein increases estrogen. Animal food requires a lot of enzymes to digest it.

At the Gerson Institute, it usually takes 5-7 days to cure type 2 diabetes.  No insulin is needed after the cure.  In extreme cases it may take 2 weeks.

AMA is trying to get rid of chiropractors.
Half of the FDA's funding comes from drug companies.

Some quotes I discovered from the film:

"I will use treatment to help the sick, I will never use it to injure them or wrong them.  I will not give poison to anyone."-The Hippocratic Oath
"It is illegal to find a cure for cancer"-Pat McGrady Jr.
"The forces within us are the true healers"-Hippocrates.
"Everybody but the patient is doing well in the cancer business"-Richard Ericson


**10/11
Lying with statistics: How conventional medicine confuses the public with absolute risk vs. relative risk  by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger.
 I recently watched the documentary, "Healing Cancer from the Inside Out", and it has changed the way I view the cancer industry even more.  I disturbingly discovered something called relative and absolute risk, and how the cancer industry manipulates this data.
Which drug would you rather take? One that reduces your risk of cancer by 50 percent, or another drug that only eliminates cancer in one out of 100 people? Most people would choose the drug that reduces their risk of cancer by 50 percent, but the fact is, both of these numbers refer to the same drug. They’re just two different ways of looking at the same statistic. One way is called relative risk; the other way is absolute risk.
Here's how it works: Let’s say that in a trial involving 100 people, two people would normally get breast cancer during the trial duration, but when all 100 people are put on the drug, only one person gets breast cancer, meaning the reduction of breast cancer is one person out of 100. Yet the pharmaceutical industry will exclaim that the relative riskreduction is 50 percent because one is 50 percent of two. In other words, the risk is cut in half from a relative point of view.
The headlines promoting this drug, therefore, will always talk about the relative risk -- "A whopping 50 percent reduction in risk!" -- and these headlines will be parroted by the mainstream press, medical journals, the FDA, doctors and drug marketing reps who are always pushing and exaggerating the supposed benefits of their drugs while minimizing their risks. Because, you see, even though this drug may help one out of 100 people, its side effects create increased risks to all 100 people. Everyone suffers some harm from the potential side effects of the drug, even if that harm is not immediately evident. Yet only one out of 100 people was actually helped by the drug.  When you look at drug claims, especially new miracle-sounding claims on drugs like Herceptin, be aware that these statistics are routinely given as relative statistics, not absolute. The numbers are distorted to make the drugs look more effective than they really are. Herceptin, for example, produced only a 0.6% absolute reduction in breast cancer risk, yet the medical hucksters pushing this drug are wildly screaming about it being a "breast cancer cure!" and demanding that practically all breast cancer patients be immediately put on it. Yet it's not even effective on one person out of a hundred. 
Reverse the perspective for natural treatments
At the same time, when conventional medicine promoters want to discredit a natural substance, an herbal remedy or the effects of nutrition on health, they always talk about absolute risk. If taking green tea supplements reduce the risk of cancer by that same 50 percent, eliminating cancer in one out of 100 patients, the news about that supplement would be something like this: "Green tea doesn’t work. Only helps one out of 100 patients." In fact, a study comparing some anti-cancer drug with green tea might report: "New breakthrough drug reduces cancer risk by 50 percent! Green tea only helps one out of 100."
It’s the old joke about an Olympic race between the United States and the old Soviet Union. In the race, there were only two participants. The Soviet runner came in first, the U.S. runner came in second, but the U.S. newspapers reported, "U. S. Wins Silver Medal, Soviet Union Comes In Next to Last." Now you know how drug companies, the FDA, the popular press and many doctors lie with this numerical shell game. It's a clever way to promote the minuscule benefits of pharmaceuticals while discrediting the enormous healing effects of natural remedies.
Now, do you want to hear some real statistics on cancer? I’ll share a few. Out of every 100 women who might get breast cancer, 50 of them can avoid breast cancer by simply getting adequate levels of vitamin D in their body, and that’s available free of charge through sensible exposure to natural sunlight, which produces vitamin D. This vitamin, all by itself, reduces relative cancer risk by 50 percent, which is better than any prescription drug that has ever been invented by any drug company in the world. Combine that with green tea, and your prevention of breast cancer gets even stronger. Even the World Health Organization says that 70 percent of all cancers are preventable, and in my view, that number is conservative, because if you combine sunlight therapy and green tea with anti-cancer herbs, anti-cancer foods such as garlic, onions, raw broccoli and raw sprouts, plus some rain forest herbs that are well-known for inhibiting the growth of cancer cells, then you can boost your cancer prevention success to well over 90 percent. There’s nothing in the world of pharmaceutical medicine that even comes close. Yet the only thing you’ll ever hear from  the drug company-controlled mainstream media, medical journals, the FDA and most old-school doctors is that natural remedies are useless, but prescription drugs have all been scientifically proven. Sure they have, if you fall for the relative risk gimmick and can't do basic math.