well at least temporarily, but he will have sustained major damage to his body and his immune
system. How much better it is to nourish the immune system directly by the use of natural therapies to
assist it in getting you well instead of destroying it by the use of these therapies. Then the immune
system itself can kill the cancer cells without any side effects and heal your body at the same time.” ~
Dr. Lorraine Day, M.D., University of California; Associate Professor San Francisco School of
Medicine, and Vice Chairman of the Department of Orthopedic Surgery.Any claims that surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy are effective are invalid for most types of
cancer. Patients who don’t receive any medical treatment at all still do better and have significantly
higher survival rates than those who do. Yet, dozens of cancer trials, including some randomized ones,
claim that these therapies are effective and save lives. In October 2007, the mass media spread the news
that for the first time mortality rates for breast cancer and some other cancers had dropped by a few
percent, indicating that real progress is being made in the fight against cancer. However, as explained
below, survival figures are unreliable and misleading as a measure of the efficacy of conventional
treatments for cancer.
The media cited early detection to be a major cause for the lower mortality rates. In a sense, they are
actually right about this, but for the wrong reasons. Early detection has not been shown to change overall
mortality rates from cancer. Earlier diagnosis following screening merely starts the survival clock earlier.
In other words, a patient can still die at the same time but appear to have lived longer.
For example, two women at age 45 develop the same type of breast cancer. The tumor size is exactly
the same—small and just about detectable. One of the two women (woman A) is diagnosed with and
treated for her early-stage breast cancer. The other woman (woman B) is not aware of her cancer for
another 3 years because she missed her routine exams. Her cancer has grown to a stage IV tumor. It can
easily take 3 years for a cancer to grow from a stage I to a stage IV. Both women die at age 51. The
question arises, who lived longer? According to what the cancer industry would want us believe, woman
A lived three years longer than woman B; but of course this is not true, it just appears that way. That‘s
where the deception comes into play.
Although cancer does not begin with its diagnosis, this is the way mortality rates are calculated. Since
woman A lived for a full 6 years after her initial diagnosis, she would be considered a breast cancer
survivor because she lived beyond the 5-year survival benchmark. She is being added to the “success”
list. It doesn’t matter that she died a year later. Woman B, on the other hand, is being added to the
“mortality” list because she died 3 years after her cancer diagnosis. The net result of this number game is
that, with early detection of cancers, mortality rates seem to go down, although the exact opposite is true.
More and more people develop cancer each day, and this trend remains unchanged.
The cancer industry uses early detection methods as a way to “extend” the number of years of cancer
survival after treatment to beyond the crucial 5-year benchmark and thereby “lower” mortality rates and
“increase” the number of survivors. As a result, orthodox cancer therapy is now being heralded as
bringing about the medical “breakthrough” we all have been waiting for. It is the hope of this industry to
that the recent media blitz and sponsored cancer awareness campaigns will encourage more people to opt
for the now successful medical treatments instead of seeking any of the alternative, less costly, treatment
options (which have become a big threat to the medical industry). Almost everyone in the U.S. now
knows someone who either had cancer and died or greatly suffered as a result of undergoing the
conventional treatments of chemotherapy, radiation and surgery. Relatively few survive these treatments,
not because of them but in spite of them. Still, the cancer business keeps growing bigger, while it
continues to be the main obstacle for finding the real cure for cancer.