Chemo & Radiation Dismal Failure Rate, Cause Cancer
Article regarding common cancer treatments...
Quote:
It is ironic, in a sick sort of way, that two of the primary cancer treatments used in conventional medicine today are both known to cause cancer. Both chemotherapy drugs and radiation treatments increase the risk that more cancers will grow elsewhere in the body, even if they appear to reduce the size of certain treated tumors. This disturbing fact alone proves the illegitimacy of both types of treatment.
Not only can radiation cause cancer, but not just sometimes but frequently, when they go in to radiate tumors, not with the hope of killing them, but their best hope to forstall their growth, the radiation leaves the patient in terrible long term, essentially unending and agonizing pain.
These are the patients they don't tell you about. These are the patients who die the worst deaths. These are the patients doused in morphine into the last moments of their exsistence as their bodies rot under the curse of radiation... likely far worse than the cancer would have been. We in hopsice know all about them
... and their physicians? their chemo and radiation physicians?? they drive to work in their Lexus sedans and Mercedes sports coupes
__________________
"first they ignore you
then they laugh at you
then they fight you
then you win".... Mahatma Ghanda
Those 2 protocols interfere with the methylation process. This causes mutation and damage to the DNA. They know that. They consider it a minor risk.
There is a TV advertisement of a procedure in Austin of using a very narrow beam of radiation to target a cancerous tumor. They consider the accuracy of this beam to be high enough to only target the tumor. This is as important as another study where something was introduced into the tumor that would cause even higher heat when using radiation. I think they are going in the right direction with these procedures. But it is only for cancerous tumors.
__________________
-
- Jim "The most powerful force ever known on this planet is human cooperation � a force for construction and destruction.� (Jonathan Haidt)
An aunt died in 07. She had radiation, after a week of it she quit and then right after she went downhill extremely fast. About a month later she passed away. Another aunt was told by a doc that he will give her a mild dose of chemo. That was on a friday, she passed way the following tuesday. Lots of other stories I know about people getting much worse and dying right after chemo or radiation. Of course I know stories of those that were helped also (mainly breast cancer stage 1 or 2) and one relative had colon cancer and after a surgery was given chemo and he was fine, but basically I see more negative results and or no results as opposed to positive results. I do know people who did macrobiotics: one cure, one major remission and a great quality of life and another in which teh cancer stopped progressing.
A woman I worked with died not long after treatment of chemo and radiation therapy for breast cancer.
My mum also died from breast cancer, double masectomy, I must admit she did live for a few years, but in the end she got liver cancer as well as her breast cancer spread throughout her body, the Tamoxifen, that she was on, has a side affect of liver cancer.
ozzie
Sorry but you can't be serious; using "naturalnews.com" as if it was some kind of reliable new/information source? The same site that pimps infamous and blatant quackery like the Gerson method, baking soda as "a successful alternative cure for cancer" and Simoncini who brilliantly declared cancer a type of fungus? buh bye credibility.
PS and oh btw, chemo cannot cause cancer and saying "radiation causes cancer" is an extreme oversimplification, to put it kindly, and radiation treatments have extremely good success rates against various cancers. Not to say either are always the answer by any means though.
There is a TV advertisement of a procedure in Austin of using a very narrow beam of radiation to target a cancerous tumor.
I have to wonder about this �pin point� beam.
Before it can get to the cancerous tumor will it not first have to go through some healthy tissue? Then once it hits the tumor does it stop right there or continue on through and start zapping and healthy tissue on the other side?
I'll take information from Natural News over the information provided by our western "disease care" system any day. And I would definitely seek out the Gerson clinic or Dr Burzynski before ever subjecting myself to radiation or chemotherapy.
You're a troll.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bill5
Sorry but you can't be serious; using "naturalnews.com" as if it was some kind of reliable new/information source? The same site that pimps infamous and blatant quackery like the Gerson method, baking soda as "a successful alternative cure for cancer" and Simoncini who brilliantly declared cancer a type of fungus? buh bye credibility.
PS and oh btw, chemo cannot cause cancer and saying "radiation causes cancer" is an extreme oversimplification, to put it kindly, and radiation treatments have extremely good success rates against various cancers. Not to say either are always the answer by any means though.
Sorry but you can't be serious; using "naturalnews.com" as if it was some kind of reliable new/information source? The same site that pimps infamous and blatant quackery like the Gerson method, baking soda as "a successful alternative cure for cancer" and Simoncini who brilliantly declared cancer a type of fungus? buh bye credibility.
PS and oh btw, chemo cannot cause cancer and saying "radiation causes cancer" is an extreme oversimplification, to put it kindly, and radiation treatments have extremely good success rates against various cancers. Not to say either are always the answer by any means though.
Radiation has lousy success rates and as for chemo, many of them are highly carcinigenic. Quick history lesson, after WW2 they were transporting a ship to italy that was carrying a mustard gas derivative. there was some type of accident and the ship sunk along with the poison leaking in the water and exposing the people. Everyone exposed had very low white cell counts. They figured this might be a good leukemia treatment. But nitrogen mustards are highly carcinogenic, as are many of the chemo agents.
I have to wonder about this �pin point� beam.
Before it can get to the cancerous tumor will it not first have to go through some healthy tissue? Then once it hits the tumor does it stop right there or continue on through and start zapping and healthy tissue on the other side?
Very good points, as usual. The advertisement showed an animation that seemed like it was laser accuracy. But even hot laser would burn everything in its path. I looked it up and found https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikiped...iki/Cyberknife but no assertion of collateral damage with this radiation.
I just brought this up in the course of conversation of the thread. I don't know if I would even opt for this type of surgery. I would hope that I have the courage to first try alternative cancer treatments. However, in panic, courage does not exist. Not for me anyway.
Interesting. I don't think it takes more courage to use alternative methods, just more knowledge of the treatments and their success rates (not to mention they don't have horrible side effects).
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfh
I would hope that I have the courage to first try alternative cancer treatments. However, in panic, courage does not exist. Not for me anyway.
Interesting. I don't think it takes more courage to use alternative methods, just more knowledge of the treatments and their success rates (not to mention they don't have horrible side effects).
Well, knowing my nature, I would panic upon hearing that the tumor is aggressive. I panic easily. If an alternative protocol looks to be taking too long, I would panic more and make an irrational decision.
I'm a worry wart. If I have nothing to worry about, I'll invent something. I think it is genetic. My mother had the same disease. Worry, worry, worry.
I'll take information from Natural News over the information provided by our western "disease care" system any day. And I would definitely seek out the Gerson clinic or Dr Burzynski before ever subjecting myself to radiation or chemotherapy.
Good luck w/that.
Quote:
You're a troll.
Disagreeing with you does not make me a troll. You're an idiot. Don't forget the tinfoil hat.
I was calling you a troll because you seem to disagree with all the postings on here. People come here to learn, you come here to argue.
This is a board to discuss ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS. Bill5 is a troll, he should go to some Pfizer/Merck sponsered board and then he can jizz all over the screen.