Conventional Cancer Treatments versus Alternative Cancer Therapies

iv drip

My article The Cancer Fraud has begun to elicit criticism from defenders of conventional medicine. It is difficult to change paradigms, especially when so much is at stake. My heart goes out to cancer sufferers and their families. However difficult it is to consider new ideas, we must face them if we are to avoid the inevitable suffering that cancer produces. Conventional medicine is an abysmal failure in treating cancer. It is time to face that fact.

A defender of conventional medicine has raised some good points that I would like to address. Following are his points and my response to each one.

Effectiveness of Conventional Treatments

“You know what you call alternative medicine that works? Medicine. Until that point alternative medicine has either been proven to be not right, or not proven to be right.”

Your definition of conventional medicine is treatments that have proven effective, while alternative medicine is comprised of treatments that are not proven in their effectiveness. When they are, they become conventional medicine.

While in an ideal world, this idea would be sound. In an ideal world, men would always tell the truth. Men would not hide, distort or even overlook information for personal gain. In an ideal world, doctors would be able to sift through the latest research without pressures or preconceived ideas. In an ideal world, we all could shift our paradigms the moment the current one appears to be false. Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world.

The world we live in is full of fraud, greed, cherished paradigms, and just plain ignorance. In this world, valid treatments do exist for cancer, and they are either unknown by mainstream practitioners or rejected for various reasons. I cover that in my article. Just because a treatment is not practiced by the mainstream does not mean it is ineffective. It is just not accepted. I’ll cover the effectiveness of alternative treatments in the next section. In this section, I will cover the effectiveness of conventional treatments.

chemo survival rate chart Chemo 5-Yr Survival Rates
(click to enlarge)
{link url=”http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/08/05/fungus-causing-cancer-a-novel-approach-to-the-most-common-form-of-death.aspx” target=”_blank”}Curtesy: mercola.com{/link}

In the chart on the left are listed various 5-yr survival rates for different types of cancers when treated by chemotherapy.  It shows a survival rate of a whopping 2.1 percent. A review of chemo on 5-year survival rates in Australia garnered almost identical results, with a 2.3 percent success rate.

I would hardly call chemotherapy a treatment that works. In my personal experience, I have never known or heard of anyone who has survived the 5-yr mark. These studies bear out my personal experience – only 2 people out of 100 live more than 5 years when treated with chemotherapy.

Conventional medicine has always been fraught with problems, and will always be. For years, doctors mocked the idea of hand washing, and more recently, the doctor who discovered the bacterial source of ulcers was ridiculed until the evidence was too overwhelming to ignore.

That is not to say that alternative medicine doesn’t suffer as well. Both approaches suffer from the same problems. Both are practiced by men. Imperfect men. Effective treatments must be found where they exist. The imprimatur granted to conventional medicine is no guarantee of success as these 5-yr cancer studies show.

 Effectiveness of Alternative Treatments

 “You had me right up to the point of reading this gem ‘It is the lies, cover-up, and outright persecution of anyone who tells the truth about cancer being a dietary disease that can be effectively reversed without medical treatment.’. Seriously – a dietary disease? Reversed without medical treatment?? The whole ‘shoot the messenger’ aspect of this is also retarded. You assume you are right. Where’s your proof? Where are your clinical trials? How many people have YOU saved?”

Many people have been effectively cured of cancer via alternative treatments. While I am not a practitioner, there are many who are who are successfully treating cancer. Many of these people are actual MDs. Unfortunately they are hard to find. If their practice is especially effective, they are often shut down. This article provides some details on this subject. Here’s another article describing a doctor whose treatment was effective. These men are just the tip of the iceberg.

As far as clinical studies of actual treatments, how can there ever be any, when anyone who has a promising treatment is shut down? There are numerous studies showing the efficacy of dietary factors on cancer as I’ll discuss next. These are mainstream studies. Nevertheless, they are ignored. Completely ignored.

To my naysayers, I say:

You can call these alternative cancer practitioners snake oil salesmen if you want, but ask yourself this question: what will it take to convince you? When your local oncologist embraces alternative treatments? The biggest resistors to change throughout history have been doctors and scientists. They have vested interests in the status quo, and they are not about to embrace changes. That is the sad fact. It is time to face it.

Cancer and Its Relationship to Diet

“My mother was SAVED by medical intervention for her cancer. Without it she would be DEAD. I’ve also had to bury relatives who DIED because of cancer. And it had nothing to do with their diet.”

The assertion that their diet was irrelevant is a bold one, and I insist on the same level of proof of its verity that this reader demands from me. He asserts these cancers had nothing to do with their diet. I can understand his anger. Let’s just assume for the moment that cancer is indeed caused by our diet. What then? It means that we are in some measure responsible. Our ignorance, our lack of self-control, our unwillingness to have an open mind contributed to these awful outcomes. How can we live with ourselves if we faced the truth? To lose a loved one is horrible, just horrible. We can bear it only if we believe that we did the “best we could”. And I am not saying these individuals did otherwise. But, if they suffered due to ignorance, then does it justify remaining ignorant? What about when the next loved one gets cancer? And the next? What will it take to open people’s minds?

I have these questions to this writer about these cancer victims’ diets:

Did they eat sugar, corn syrup or any carbohydrates other than those found in green vegetables and fruits in their whole state? Did they eliminate all sources of vegetable oils from their diet? Did they take large amounts of fish oil daily? Did they take massive amounts of vitamin D3?

Unless they had all of  these diet practices, no one can say it had nothing to do with their diet. Not only that, these are merely the biggest and most obvious items. Let’s look at each one in more detail:

Sugar and starches

It is a well known fact that cancer feeds on sugar. Even mainstream medicine acknowledges this fact. Do oncologists tell their patients to avoid these sources of excess sugar? No. Not convinced? This article cites a study using a mouse model that showed a direct correlation to the survival rate of breast cancer to blood sugar levels. Want something more mainstream? How about this article from Reuters that states:

“Tumor cells thrive on sugar but they used the fructose to proliferate.”

With the abundant evidence for removing sugar and starches from the diet, how can anyone say that diet has no relationship to cancer?

Omega-3 Fatty Acids

Numerous studies (here & here for starters) show the relationship of excess omega-6 fatty acids as compared to omega-3 fatty acids. Dr. Mercola has even cited an instance of a man curing himself of cancer by taking large doses of fish oil. This article details the many ways in which fish oil combats cancer.

Vitamin D3

If vitamin D3 were a patented drug, it would be hailed as the miracle drug of the 21st century. It is not, so its profound benefits for health are largely ignored. It would take several articles to chronicle all its benefits. Here is a juicy one for you – taking vitamin D slashes the risk of breast cancer by 50%. In this article, vitamin D is cited as having a key role in preventing the development of cancer. Here is another source listing over 800 clinical studies citing the positive effects of vitamin D on cancer.

Conclusion

This reader wanted evidence for alternative treatments. In addition to the numerous practitioners – both M.D.s and non-M.D.s who are successfully treating thousands of patients, there are thousands of studies showing the benefits in both preventing and treating cancers with various diet factors and supplements. I have cited just a handful. If one really wants more proof, one only has to search the internet for these studies. Despite the plethora of evidence, the vanguards of cancer research such as the National Cancer Institute continue to say the results are inconclusive. In the instance I linked to, they cite studies that use inadequate levels of vitamin D, and then say the results are inconclusive.

It is not for lack of evidence that effective cancer treatments are not widely adopted. It is rather the unwillingness of so many to accept the evidence.

The sad fact is: men must preserve the status quo when it is in their interests. It doesn’t matter how many people suffer and die as a result.

 

 

 

Conventional Cancer Treatments versus Alternative Cancer Therapies by Provide Your Own is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

This entry was posted in Health and tagged , . Section: . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

10 Comments