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=”” target=”_blank”}Curtesy:{/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.


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. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. Chuck
    Posted July 28, 2011 at 10:27 am | Permalink

    Thanks for the great articles. I have been reading about alternative methods to cure cancer for a couple of years now and people don’t realize how big pharma and the medical profession has taken control of cancer treatments. From my personal experience within my immediate family, both of my parents and grandparents died of cancer. I watched as my father suffered during his chemo therapies which brought him to the brink of death. Dad had lung cancer, had part of his lung removed, went through 6 months of chemo that did not work, went through another round for six months that finally put his cancer in remission. You are correct in your statement that the doctors can keep it in remission for about 5 years, then it comes back, or they die. Dad went through three five year periods in remission, and after 15 years and chemo and radiation every five years, he finally refused to take chemo any more. I will never forget that one day I was taking Dad for his chemo treatment (he had to take every 6 weeks), and I stopped at a local fast food restaurant to get him something to eat, and when I came back to the car, he had jumped out and was trying to walk back home. Every time I took him to the hospital, we had to take a plastic trash can in the car because he would get sick just thinking about taking a treatment. At age 75 he passed away. My mother also died of lung cancer at the age of 81, but when she was diagnosed, we decided not to treat her with the traditional methods(she was too small and frail), the doctors only gave her 6 months, but she lived 2 1/2 years more without any treatmeats at all. I wished I had known about the alternative methods then. If I do develop cancer, I will do everything I can not to take chemo!

  2. Gavin
    Posted August 9, 2011 at 6:27 am | Permalink

    “The biggest resistors to change throughout history have been doctors and scientists.”

    No. Totally and utterly incorrect. Science proposes experimental outcomes based on theories, then performs experiments, looks at the results at hand and then *changes* its view based on those observations. This is what has progressed mankind through the ages. Anyone who proclaims to be a scientist, but doesn’t change their views based on real-world observations is not a scientist.

    I know you are religious, but dare I say that it is the religions of the world who fall inline with your comment above. How many scientists were burned at the stake for “witchcraft”? Why was Galileo locked up for the last years of his life? Because they disagreed with the status-quo perpetuated by the churches of the time. The same is true today, but with far larger impact…

    The Catholic church says condoms are bad and does everything it can to stop their use. Unfortunately this means millions of people in Africa are dying because of AIDS – that could be easily stopped by the use of condoms.

    It seems the church feels that AIDS is bad, but condoms are worse!

    Now that is resisting change!

    • Posted August 24, 2011 at 11:50 pm | Permalink

      I agree with you that religious convictions often lead to great bigotry. That is why scientists are some of the most closed minded people of all. While your description of the ideal scientist is wonderful, the sad truth is that scientists are shackled to their dogmas, and of course, their funding. To consider a change of course would a complete repudiation and ruin of their entire careers.

      It is interesting that you mention Galileo. His persecution by the church was not really a religious one per se, but rather because the ruling powers (the church at that time) were brought to bear to defend the disciples of Aristotle! It was not the ideas of Scripture that Galileo challenged, but the ideas of that Greek philosopher.

      You can find no finer example of persecution of those introducing new ideas to doctors than that of Semmelweis. His suffering at their hands was so severe, he was eventually confined to a mental institution where he soon died. You can read all the sordid details – here. What was this new idea? Why just washing your hands after an autopsy and before delivering a baby.

      Oh, if only doctors and scientists were as open minded as you believe them to be.

  3. Ken
    Posted August 12, 2011 at 8:58 am | Permalink

    It seems to me that the relationship between diet and cancer. Moreover the ability of diet to reverse cancer has been well documented in the book The China Study. His repeatable trials are documented and clearly indicate that a diet of 5% meat based proteins will completely reverse cancer. When meat based proteins are increased to 20 percent the cancer returns. This suggests there are actually areas to focus on, cancer prevention and cancer treatment. Both items can addressed, at least in some fashion by diet.
    There is also plenty of anecdotal evidence of the diet and its impact on cancer and other diseases in the decades that the Gerson therapy has been practiced. I encourage everyone to review this information for themselves.
    Since reading this information and changing my own lifestyle to take control of my health, I have been preaching this information to anyone that will listen. Now I have the stigma of being “that guy”. The saving grace here is that this information is becoming more mainstream despite resistance.
    Fight the Good Fight!

    • Posted August 24, 2011 at 11:55 pm | Permalink

      Thanks for the support Ken. The resistance to new ideas is especially sad when cancer is concerned. Cherished paradigms die hard.

  4. Posted August 10, 2013 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

    Great article. I wouldn’t trust the greedy pharma who are playing with people’s lives. I also add many natural cancer cure links to the cancer research institutes on Facebook, but they mysteriously disappear. I wonder why! I would also like to mention oncologist, Dr Simoncini and his baking soda cure. As all tumors are white, he classified cancer as a fungus. I have been drinking baking soda in water for several months to treat my athlete’s foot, and it really does work. Quite amazing, and so much cheaper than allicin. I would also recommend raw virgin coconut oil to everyone, especially sufferers of Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease, due to its immediate ketone release in the brain.

    • Posted August 15, 2013 at 12:48 am | Permalink


      Thank you for your excellent comments. They might be very helpful to some.

      I find the baking soda suggestion interesting for the athlete’s foot. I might experiment with that myself sometime. I have however, found a sure-cure for athlete’s foot, dandruff and any yeast/fungus infection – a low carb diet. It literally starves the fungus. Some doctors are now recommending this diet for cancer as well (due to its similarity to fungus) with good results. It would be my first line of defense if I were to ever come down with cancer.

      • Posted August 23, 2015 at 7:53 am | Permalink

        I talked with Simoncini a few times on the phone and it seems that he had problems to deliver the sodium bicarbonate near the tumor and he did this by way of intravenous and intrarterial injections. Problem is that this is hard to do, means finding a blood vessel that “feeds” the tumor, in most case very difficult to find and locate. Also this method is usaul in Radiolgy and for him it was hard to find a doctor which would agreed to to it for his pateints in Italy.

  5. Posted August 23, 2015 at 5:57 am | Permalink


  6. Donald Terry
    Posted May 20, 2016 at 10:22 pm | Permalink


    My wife is cancer free now after 4 years of bullshit with the Canadian and American medical systems. Never again will I put life in the hands of such medical doctors and health workers. They are not trying to help you and they are trying to suck money out of you then kill you with drugs “cancer fighting” poisons, surgeries and chemotherapy.My wife started to use cannabis oil after i was told she will die in a few months. I saw online where National Cancer Institute acknowledges that cannabis oil will kill cancer completely and i contacted the institute via email and i was directed to where i could get high grade quality cannabis oil. My wife started ingesting about a half gram to a gram a day. Within 2 months and the cancer started to retreat. (breast cancer) She is now cancer free and it only took 3 months with the oil. she was using chemo and radiation for years before discovering cannabis oil and we told our doctor about the cannabis oil, My doctor said he can not comment on the use of cannabis and its effect on cancer. Although he saw that my wife cancer was cured with cannabis oil.
    At this point, anyone who claims cannabis oil doesn’t have some impact on killing cancer cells is in a serious state of denial. I just can’t wait until this widely acknowledged truth is on an official level and we can see cannabis oil properly researched for further focused benefits.

11 Trackbacks