Cancer Can Be Prevented!
The Single Greatest Karl Loren Development Since The Beginning Of These 100,000 Pages
by Karl Loren
Cancer is the most dreadful of diseases.
It is a creation of chaos within a body
that had been in a state of order.
Chaos is the name of cancer. Cells are
multiplying in a chaotic manner. The cells in a cancer, themselves, have
become aberrated --
click here or on the cancer image for more pictures.
There is an alteration in the multiplication process
which is also the problem. It is as if an otherwise "healthy" cell,
supposed to reproduce every 20 days, starts reproducing every five hours.
That much growth is harmful even if the individual cells would be,
otherwise, OK. In the case of a cancer cell not only does it multiply
more rapidly than it should, but the cell itself is different from the
original cell -- before cancer. The
click here reference is a good one for a traditional understanding of
You could even say that the purpose of
life is to
bring order out of chaos. Cancer is a change towards a barbarian
state from an orderly state -- it is a movement of life toward chaos. It
doesn't have to happen. It was very rare a few hundred years ago.
I am Karl Loren. Here on this page, I
offer simplicity and a brand new science on the subject of cancer cause
found too late for simple treatments, cancer places the victim into a
hopeless state of watching this creeping plague devour his or her body.
There is, now, apparently nothing more than terrible treatments
available. There seems to be very little he or she can do -- except watch
and cry out in pain! As bad as it may be for the victim, the helpless
family and friends watch on in hopeless horror.
the cancer is bad for you, the
treatments are now well-recognized as being worse. We have people,
today, preferring to go without any treatment rather than suffer the
debilitating effects of the slash/burn/poison technology that has remained
in our health protocols since the days of barbarism!
It doesn't need to happen. Below I give
you some amazing data. There is a "remedy" described on this page -- a
remedy that reduced cancer by 90% compared to what the rate "should" have
been, by statistical prediction. That is below. But, first, I want to
show you just how terrible this cancer situation really is.
law, may not be treated by a medical doctor with any method other than
methods which, in fact, cause cancer. This evil dilemma has been created
by drug companies and doctors. Ignorant and bribed legislators have put
this crime into statutes so that it is legal to slash/burn/poison the
victim, but a violation of law to use safe and quite effective vitamin C,
for instance, to cure cancer.
Contrary to popular
misconception, fed by the Media; antioxidants, vitamin C in particular,
are powerful weapons in the fight against cancer. But there is a
question. How or why would Medical Science not know or be on the wrong
legal problem could be solved if those who want to "use" vitamin C
realized the truth -- that vitamin C does NOT cure cancer, but removes
some harmful component within the body. It was the harmful component that
CAUSED the cancer. Thus, much of "alternative medicine " may "work" but
the people who have discovered these truths have not gone further into the
science behind the alternative treatment. To give massive doses of
Vitamin C, observe that cancer disappears, is all that many healers might
do. They then claim that Vitamin C "cures" cancer. That gets them into
trouble with the law.
But, if their science were better and
they realized that Vitamin C deficiency is wide spread in man, that
Vitamin C deficiency (scurvy) in mild situations is hardly ever detected,
that a mild case of scurvy causes some
pancreatic enzyme to no longer function and that enzyme function
allows something else to cause something else that causes cancer? They
could then claim the truth.
could say that you need Vitamin C to handle mild, undetected cases of
scurvy, and that this scurvy condition is often the cause of this,
this, this, and cancer? They could say all that. They would NOT be
claiming the cure cancer, but only to "cure" a mild case of scurvy. If
all their science were well documented and they were not making
unscientific claims, they could sell their pill.
They would then, of course, have to
present the science of cancer not just the anecdotal claim that
Vitamin C handles cancer.
This page presents new science that
shows the cause of cancer. The formula recommended on this page does NOT
cure cancer, but it does handle the problem that causes the problem that
causes the problem that causes cancer. The science of all that causation
Thus, you can handle the first problem
with my formula. End! But, that problem then, solved, eliminates the
sequence of problems, and eventually the cancer is solved. That is the
legal theory here.
So, you should expect to see a new, but
very scientific explanation of cancer here -- and then see a logical
solution to one of the early problems that others have not seen. That is
what this page presents! It is a revolution, not in treatment, but in the
science of cancer causation. Not even all of that science is yet
revealed, but, believe me, it is here in the hundreds of pages on
currently restricted pages.
It is much the same with heart disease.
It would be illegal to sell some vitamin formula with the claim that it
"cures" heart disease. But, it is legal to claim that the vitamin formula
removes metals from the body. Period! That is the claim for the
vitamin formula I sell. There is then a truth, found in many
scientific studies that these metals cause a multiplication of free
radicals. There are yet other studies that show how these free radicals
cause damage in the cells of the arteries. There is yet further research,
by now far removed from the claim connected to the bottle of vitamins,
that this damage to the cells in the arteries
causes the blockage that, in turn, reduces blood flow that, in turn,
causes heart disease.
It would be technically wrong to say
vitamin formula directly improves blood flow. But, the final indirect
using the vitamin formula IS that the blood flow is improved. It is the
body's own system that cures heart disease once the toxic metals are
removed. No drug can remove a toxic metal! The American Heart
Association lied about their statistics of success, also. Click on the
AHA image for the full story of their deception over many years. The AHA
threatened to sue me for publishing this story.
So it is with cancer.
The big news here is a full and
scientifically-established truth about the origin of cancer. The "remedy"
here does NOT directly "cure" or even prevent cancer, but it does remove a
toxin from the body. This toxic substance (a metal) accumulates so that
there is "too much of it" and that excess, in turn, allows cancer to
develop and grow. Since no drug has ever been found that will remove
this particular toxin from the body, the claims are on safe legal ground.
Just as I have presented
"science" on the subject of "plaque" in heart disease -- "science"
which has never before been presented, now I present "science" about
cancer origin and prevention. This, too, is "science" which has never
before been presented in any public forum.
understand that I am not a primary researcher, but I have recognized
little pieces of truth, scattered here and there among the many thousands
of pieces of false data. I have brought together, here in this place,
those pieces of truth -- this NEW SCIENCE OF CANCER -- that have never
been presented before. That new science is spread out, mostly below.
Before we get there let's look further at the chaos of the current scene
regarding cancer research, cancer detection and cancer treatment.
There is a formula that removes a
particular toxin from the body -- a toxin that, ultimately, causes cancer.
That is the wondrous new science
presented on these pages in detail. Part of my purpose is not only to
present this new science, but to show the falsity of the old science. The
old science is really the creation of a category of health care usually
called the "allopathic approach" to health care.
Click here for a major article by me on the subject of "Allopathy."
This the major page, among 20,000, that
presents the full story of the horrors of so-called cancer treatment --
and explains exactly what causes cancer and, finally, explains exactly how
cancer can be prevented.
There are those who have claimed to be
researching for a cure for cancer.
They have begged the public and received
billions of dollars. The government has given them billions of dollars.
They say they do research into cancer and how to prevent. They have been
a miserable failure. Their failure is being revealed and their world is
crumbling. In fact, the National Cancer Institute has requested more than
$1 billion increase in their budget from 2002, asking for almost $6
billion on research for 2003! (source)
That story, large and small, is told in
Let's start with a quote from the famous
Dr. Linus Pauling:
should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud and that the
major cancer research organisations are derelict in their duties to the
people who support them." - Linus Pauling PhD (Two-time Nobel Prize
For years the official agency for cancer
statistics (National Cancer Institute) has been falsely reporting that
cancer rates are declining. They use this, then, to brag about their
research results and to ask for more research money. The drug companies
doing actually woeful research are all too happy to be able to report that
THEIR drugs are winning the war on cancer!
Instead, the National Cancer Institute
has finally admitted that their previous statistics were false:
registries throughout the country keep records of the number of new
cancers diagnosed in their area. Ten population-based registries report
this information to the NCI's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End
Results (SEER) Program. The standard time between a cancer diagnosis and
its initial inclusion in cancer incidence statistics is about 2 years.
However, longer delays in the reporting of the data can lead to an
underestimation of cancer incidence whereas reporting errors may
contribute to an overestimation of cancer incidence for the cancer sites
examined. The net effects of these corrections on cancer incidence would
increase in cancer incidence rates for more current diagnosis years. (Source)
The stories about cancer "research" are
replete with failure -- while ignoring the real people who are dieing.
something called metastatic soft tissue sarcoma. It's rare, but every
oncologist in the civilized world knows I'm a goner if I don't get
lucky. A few thousand cases are diagnosed each year; an equal number
die. There's no cure. For about a third of us chemotherapy can "buy some
time," but at a terrible price. Generally, regular surgery is the way to
stay alive. The cancer grows slowly, and the tumors can be "resected" as
they appear. Eventually, you have so many that surgery is no longer
The American Cancer Society puts out the
same type of false statistics, for the sole purpose of claiming that they
are winning the war on cancer, so they can get more donations. Their
statistics are false. Here is a report:
The American Cancer
Society's website graphical data purposefully avoids showing comparable
on age-adjusted cancer incidence for similar years (1930 1996) because
it would illustrate a steep increase in incidence (the number of new
cancer cases recorded) during that period. Instead, they focus on death
rates which have no bearing whatsoever on the numbers of people getting
cancer to begin with. (Source)
You might think that false statistics
don't affect YOU? Not true! The problem with false statistics is that
these agencies then strongly recommend treatments based on the false
success they have been claiming. You may not want to have radical surgery
for cancer, but the doctor waves these false claims in your face and looks
at you with a steely glare, "The National Cancer Institute proves that
this is the right treatment for you! This is the treatment that has been
reducing cancer rates. So, this is the treatment you should get!"
There are thousands of medical clinics
still telling this lie:
The combination of
breast conserving surgery and radiation therapy has been established as
a safe and effective alternative to mastectomy for many women. Breast
conserving surgery removes the area of cancer in the breast along with a
surrounding margin of normal breast tissue. This is then followed by
radiation therapy to the remaining breast tissue. (source)
There have been many of these
accusations about false statistics, for years. The above quote from the
National Cancer Institute is the first official admission. But, respected
authorities have said the same thing long ago.
1986 report in the New England Journal of Medicine assessed progress
against cancer in the United States during the years 1950 to 1982.
Despite progress against some rare forms of cancer, which account for 1
to 2 per cent of total deaths caused by the disease, the report found
that the overall death rate had increased substantially since 1950: "The
main conclusion we draw is that some 35 years of intense effort focused
largely on improving treatment must be judged a qualified failure." The
report further concluded that ". . . we are losing the war against
cancer" and argued for a shift in emphasis towards prevention if there
is to be substantial progress. (4) (source)
Not only are the rates of cancer
INCREASING, but there has been a flurry of new revelations -- cancer
treatments which, yesterday, were "exactly right" are now being exposed as
worthless. One reason is that the drug companies exercise rigid control
over money spent on cancer research. If it isn't research for a
patentable drug, then there is no money! Cancer research is in a state of
total of 108 research institutions participated in the study.
Respondents said only 2% of their contracts established an independent
executive committee to oversee the design and conduct of
industry-sponsored trials. And only 1% required a data and safety
monitoring board overseeing design and conduct.
centers surveyed in the study also reported that only 1% of their
contracts require that researchers, who typically work at a single
medical site, have access to the clinical data at other sites in the
are dangers here," said Kevin Schulman, a professor of medicine at Duke
University Medical Center, Durham, N.C., and the lead author of the
study. "Our findings suggest that a re-evaluation of the process of
contracting for clinical research is urgently needed." (source)
Cancer research, generally, is in the
tank. How does that relate to individual forms of treatment? First there
is detection of cancer -- in the tank! Then there is the slash technology
-- now disproved. Then there is the burn technology -- now disproven.
Then there is the poison technology -- now disproved. These items are
taken up fully, below.
There is even more fraud. You think a
biopsy is OK. You get one. The test materials are sent to a diagnostic
lab for analysis. Dr. Garry F. Gordon is, I think, the most brilliant
physician on the planet. He does not use any drugs, and he does not take
any health insurance or Medicare money. I have many pages about his views
on cancer and heart disease --
Dr. Gordon HERE.
now, he says, the Government and Medicare have become the largest
consumers of testing facilities, and that they have continuously beaten
down the prices for various tests, including a policy of paying somewhat
less than the "breakeven" fee for a test. As a result, the testing labs
have had to lower their costs and no longer perform honest work.
diagnostic lab services are 100% paid by Medicare, and labs can’t charge
people on Medicare additional amounts for covered services. Except for
a few exceptions, Medicare does not cover screening blood tests. (source)
. . . .
Example 1: A
laboratory technician travels 60 miles round trip from a lab in a city
to a remote rural location, and back to the lab to draw a single
Medicare patient’s blood. The total reimbursement would be $45.00 (60
miles x .75 cents a mile), plus the specimen collection fee of $3.00. (source)
. . . .
The Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has proposed that it plans to pay
hospitals $32.54 for diagnostic mammograms in 2002, which is a 7.5% cut
from the present rate of $35.17. Many experts have deemed current rates
too low forcing many facilities to leave this business, which in turn
has caused widespread delays for such tests being performed for routine
Even when Medicare increases the fee it
will pay, it is obviously then also controlling the type of medicine your
doctor can practice.
The CMS is also
proposing a 22% increase to $760.09 for surgical outpatient biopsy, as
opposed to paying a 6% reduction for reimbursement for needle biopsy to
$384.87. the needle biopsy procedure takes about 15 minutes under a
local anesthetic. Thus the CMS is giving encouragement to the doctors to
perform the costlier procedure. The American Cancer Society estimated
that there will be 192,200 new cases of breast cancer diagnosed this
year, and that 40,200 women will die from the disease in 2001. About 1.2
million women get breast biopsies every year. (source)
I have written that even the needle biopsy increases the risk of
spread of cancer. The surgical biopsy even more increases the risk of
cancer spread. And it is this method by which the Government controls
what you doctor does -- he is NOT YOUR doctor, but the paid pawn of the
So called "health insurance" is really
"disease assurance." This was one of the
earliest philosophical articles I wrote -- our health care system can
only get worse as long as most people regard health care as a "right" --
something they get for free from the government.
Gordon mentions, in particular, this "Nichols" lab which was purchased by
and then other formerly independent labs purchased by Dow-Corning.
Quest Diagnostics is the nation's leading
provider of diagnostic testing, information and services. Our clients
include patients and consumers, physicians, hospitals, health
insurers, employers and government agencies. (source)
Quest had income of $40 BILLION FOR THE
THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2001. (Source)
Quest Diagnostics is
testing its ability to become the world's leading clinical lab. The
company performs more than 100 million tests annually, including
cholesterol, HIV, and alcohol tests. The firm has labs throughout the US
and in Mexico and the UK. Quest also performs esoteric testing (complex,
low-volume tests) and clinical trials; about a third of its clinical
trial testing is for GlaxoSmithKline, which owns about 25% of the firm.
The company serves doctors, hospitals, HMOs, and other labs, as well as
corporations, government agencies, and prisons. (Source)
Per the data
HERE, Dow Corning has had a long term interest in acquiring medical
acquisition of International Clinical would significantly boost
Corning's market presence, doubling the size and expanding the territory
of the Corning, N. Y. -based company's Metpath laboratory operations,
which provide medical testing for physicians. The Metpath unit operates
13 clinical-testing labs, primarily in the Northeast. International
Clinical, which operates 13 labs on the West Coast and in the South, had
net income of $4.8 million on sales of $205.5 million for the fiscal
year ended Aug. 31. (source)
At MetPath, a subsidiary of Corning
Incorporated and a nationwide operator of medical laboratories, the
company's lifeblood would appear to be specimen testing and clinical
pathology. But their real business is information, and a savvy
application of Symbol`s two-dimensional portable data file technology,
PDF417, is helping MetPath beat the competition.
"The bulk of our work
comes from multi-physician practices," said Luis Eguren, manager of
computer operations for MetPath`s New England Region, headquartered in
New Britain, Conn. "We test biological specimens which include blood
work, urinalysis, drug screening, HIV, cholesterol and premarital blood
Click HERE for examples of mal-practice law suits against Quest and
MetPath for improper testing procedures and results.
claimed, in her pathology malpractice suit, that on March 23, 1989,
Metpath misdiagnosed her husband's mole that was removed by his doctor,
as being benign. Unfortunately, by 1996 it had grown back and was then
correctly diagnosed as malignant melanoma. Even more unfortunately, it
metastasized and eventually killed him October 27, 1998. (source)
As a result of the lower fees, and the
purchase by large commercial interests, Dr. Gordon says he would not use
that lab, or any of many labs, any further for tests. So, he talks often
of various new testing facilities, doing tests that are not yet approved
for reimbursement by the Government, and so are not yet subject to the
lowered fees, and lowered quality of the test results.
It is an interesting factor to keep in
mind when your doctor says, "We need to send a sample of your blood to the
lab for testing!" Almost never would you suspect that the very "free"
medicine you so much want, is driving down the quality of the very care
you get. You can't have it both ways. A socialized medical system will
deliver cheap and inferior medical care.
There is the expected exception to
research on cancer treatments. Drug companies do research too -- and they
can't stand fraud on their research lines. So, even if they are
completely dominated by the need to be able to patent a drug, they at
least keep the research clean.
Two drug companies, in particular, have
zeroed in on a "protein" as the target for treating cancer. That is all
you will read in their press releases. You will read much more about this
"protein target" on THESE pages.
Profitable? Two of them are extremely
They are getting a good understanding of
what causes cancer. Their problem is that they must be able to treat
cancer with a drug. They think they have done it. So does the market.
One of these companies has the largest profit margin of any large US
Here is how they approach cancer.
current success traces back to 1995, when the company decided to proceed
with development of two cancer drugs that were on the verge of being
those drugs, Herceptin, is now a standard treatment for a type of
metastatic breast cancer. It was one of the first drugs to target a
genetic defect that contributes to cancer and works by gumming up a
cellular protein called Her2 that regulates growth in some fast-growing
breast cancers. Doctors like it because it doesn't have the toxic side
effects of chemotherapy and can be used along with traditional
Click here to read my analysis of why and how Herceptin "works" and
why it is still a fraud on the market place.
Despite all this research cancer rates
are increasing, not decreasing. That's the national scene. On the
personal scene the news is always bad for the one man or woman who gets
cancer. Not only is it bad to get cancer, but the formally "successful"
forms of treatment no longer are being seen, even by the individual, as
helpful. What is she or he to do?
All of this is developed in detail in
this article by me, Karl Loren.
But, the bigger and better story is how
obvious the prevention of cancer has been. The evidence, the scientific
studies, the reports? They have been written, even published, but then
deliberately and systematically hidden and denounced by the cancer and
G. Edward Griffin said, many years ago, there are more people "living on"
the lies about cancer than there are people who are dying from this
disease. Both figures are a disgrace!
There is a huge cancer industry --
billions of dollars of income, like the money "earned" by drug overlords,
are stolen out of your pockets by the drug companies, and even doctors who
do know better. That is not a small statement since cancer is the second
largest killer in our society.
Click on the image to go to a web site
offering this book for sale.
This is NOT a small story, so be
prepared to see evils revealed, and truth presented. No less an authority
than Karl Loren has taken his pen against the sword of death hanging over
society -- a society which, even now, mostly believes that chemotherapy,
radiation and surgery are the best we can do in this great country.
The drug companies, in their candid
moments, will admit that their research is NOT aimed at curing cancer, but
One of the most
powerful voices for "modernizing drug technology is the President and
CEO of Merck, the makers of Mevacor,
cholesterol-lowering drug. Mr. Raymond
Gilmartin, on November 29, 1994, said: "To us, disease management means
treating diseases more effectively primarily by using pharmaceuticals
more effectively." This was in a speech to the New
Society of Securities Analysis. The Associated Press article that
quoted Mr. Gilmartin said: "The disease management concept is getting
increased discussion in drug industry circles as manufacturers seek ways
to keep profits growing in an era when insurance companies and health
care plans are demanding lower costs." Even though that quote is [more
than] eight years old, you know that the pressures on lowering drug
costs are even higher now. When the drug will "manage" a disease,
cheaply, that will be the ideal item for society! (source)
They are not only NOT the best
treatments, they are bad. These are exactly the therapies which CAUSE
cancer to start and spread. They are not designed to cure, but to keep
you alive in a hospital bed as long as the insurance will pay.
The story about the fraud in medical
treatment for heart disease is larger in terms of the number of people who
die, but death from heart disease doesn't have the creeping dread of
watching some small part of your body start to rot, to turn against you
and grow into a malignancy that, finally, sends you to a painful death.
exists in a world of chaos. It is time for simplicity!
I bring that to you!
There is a prevention. There is a
cure. But, not for "cancer." Instead there is a prevention and cure for
the toxic condition that allows cancer to form and grow. No drug will
ever make the claim of removing a toxin. Drugs only add toxins to the
body, not remove them.
NEW SCIENCE being reported on these pages. These pages should brings
a tremendous shock to the "cancer industry." But these pages bring hope
to mankind! We'll see!
Even that simple statement must be
followed by saying that MY FORMULA "only" removes metals from your body.
But, the truth allows me to also say
that it is toxic metals in your body that CAUSE a great increase in the
number of and the activity of something called "free radicals" in your
And, the truth allows me to also say
that these free radicals are the proven and sole cause of cancer.
The story has much more in rich detail,
but that is the simplicity of the story for this entire web site. The
simplicity is that if you remove those metals, the free radical activity
is very greatly reduced and the chances of cancer are greatly reduced.
One study shows a 90% reduction in expected cancer because of this
remedy! I'll get to that study below.
That is the truth of it.
And, here you will find that truth.
Cancer? or Spread The Cancer
The most common form
of detection of cancer is simply self-examination. It is worthless as a
technology. Read here:
Cancer & Biopsy
Many people get "lumps." Woman find them in a breast and sometimes die of worry!
Have You Ever Found A Lump?
Particularly in the
case of women's breast cancer you have heard countless public service
announcements that teach a woman how to examine her own breasts -- looking
for lumps. That is now well established as a bankrupt technology of
A major effort to teach self-examination
so women could detect early, small lumps of a developing breast cancer
did not reduce the rate of breast cancer deaths, suggesting the
technique is a waste of time for doctors and patients, according to a
study of more than 260,000 women in China. (source)
can the American doctors do about this? The Chinese are not so much
concerned with covering up their own lies on cancer treatment. They are
more interested in solving the problem. If you want to SOLVE the problem
you would also have to look at the cost of the solution compared to the
results. In China they decided to try this "American" technique of
self-exam. They worked hard to educate some 260,000 Chinese woman on the
technology of "self-examination." The conclusion was that it is not worth
the time -- that it is a waste of time. That is the report directly from
China, quoted above.
Now, the American
Cancer Industry is very big business -- it is NOT concerned with
preventing or curing cancer, but only use cancer as a cash cow to give the
researchers, drug companies, and doctors a continuing source of money.
So, they have a different reason. They need some excuse to blame the
woman for her cancer -- so that the Cancer Industry doesn't get blamed for
So, in America, and
other so-called "Westernized and modern medical areas," they don't want to
hear that self exam is worthless. They want the woman to try this useless
technique. She will fail to find the cancer. Then, when some doctor finds
it, with his better technology, he can shake his head and nod grimly.
"You didn't do your self exam!" to the poor woman. When she protests that
she did it? He then simply says, "Well, you didn't do it right because
here is the cancer -- right here. You missed it."
So in the US and
Western countries, the Chinese announcement is truly bad news, even if it
is completely true.
Instead of embracing
the truth of it, they spout out more lies, as this quote:
The Journal of the National Cancer
Institute recently published the results of a Chinese study discouraging
women from practicing breast self exams, citing a BSE may not reduce the
risk of death from breast cancer. Coverage of the story has been
confusing and may mislead women to neglect practicing good breast
You see, there is
not only a "cancer industry" but there is a large "sub-industry" devoted
to nothing more than promoting and teaching woman to do self-examinations
of their breasts, and to teach them to feel guilty when they fail -- as
they will -- to find the cancers that are there.
I've written, years
ago, about this foolish technique, but now the main stream media is
recognizing the foolishness too! I predict that health care will continue
to fall on a path toward doom in Western Society, while health care in
Russia, China and many other "poor" countries will move ahead rapidly. My
major article on this
The most common cancer for women is
breast cancer. (Note)
The most common form of "treatment" is
called "self-examination." Virtually every doctor pounds on you that you
MUST do a self-examination of your breasts -- you women. They are saying
this because they are aware of the growing hostility toward medical
fiddling with your health -- not to say your breasts.
So, examine yourself.
Except that doesn't work as I reported
Click here for more on that sad news, this time from the Wall Street
blow to the hope that early detection of breast cancer will save lives,
the most-rigorous-ever study of the value of teaching women breast
self-examination has found that it doesn't reduce the risk of dying from
study of 266,064 women in Shanghai showed the death rate from breast
cancer among those who became proficient at monthly self-exams after
intensive instruction was no different from women who received no
instruction and who didn't practice self-examination. Tumors in the exam
group weren't even found at an earlier, more treatable stage.
finding, reported in Wednesday's issue of the Journal of the National
Cancer Institute and coming, ironically, as Breast Cancer Awareness
Month begins, threatens to dash the hopes of women who are already
reeling from the controversy over whether regular mammograms save lives.
An editorial in the medical journal pulls no punches: "At least for the
great majority of women whose [exam] practice is not optimal, it does
not reduce the risk of dying of breast cancer," write Russell Harris and
Linda Kinsinger of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. (Source)
equally worthless, but these are also dangerous.
Click here to view some photo images of mammogram examinations.
You should know, of
course, that a mammogram uses X-Rays to examine your breasts. The doctors
don't like to tell you they are X-Rays, because most people know that
X-Rays are dangerous. But, that is the technology.
Click here for a general article by Karl Loren on testing technology,
"Mammograms increase the risk for developing breast cancer and raise the
risk of spreading or metastasizing an existing growth," says Dr. Charles
B. Simone, a former clinical associate in immunology and pharmacology at
the National Cancer Institute. Safer and even more effective diagnostic
techniques like infrared thermography, has been vigorously attacked by
the Breast Cancer Awareness organizations. (Source)
What you may have
thought was safe? Is not safe? The only safety lies in understanding the
deceptive nature of cancer research and cancer treatment.
Once you or your
doctor finds some lump, or suspicious mass, the very most expected thing
to do is get a biopsy!
Why not? They are
quick, virtually painless and covered by insurance.
Except that IF there
is a cancer there, the biopsy starts the spreading. The doctor won't tell
you BEFORE the biopsy, but if he finds cancer there, then he tells you
that you have no more time left, but need to "have
that left breast cut off NOW."
Biopsy leads to the
slash/burn/poison technology. It gives you little time to explore
alternatives. The doctors are terrified that you will find some
alternative and further pour their technology down the toilet.
Because if there IS cancer there, the
biopsy is likely to cause it to start spreading.
Click here for a very full report on this common practice, whereby the
doctor spreads the cancer without telling you.
It just makes sense. The word "biopsy"
comes from "bio-" which means "life," and "-psy" which is
from the larger Greek word, "opsis" meaning "vision" -- thus, a
"biopsy" is a look at life, or an
examination of living tissue. One way or another, a "piece" of your
flesh, or of some part of your body, is cut out so that it can be examined
under a microscope.
Typically the doctor who does the actual
biopsy will place a color stain on the sample tissue -- a stain that makes
the cells easy to see. Then he treats the sample with paraffin so that
the individual cells won't be moving around, or changed. By this time, of
course, the cells are no longer alive. He then SLICES the paraffin into
thin slices -- about the thickness of a few cells.
THIS is what he looks at. When it is
done this way several people can look at the same sample and come to an
Different parts of your body will have
different rates of cell division. For instance, brain cells never
divide. You got what you got! Other cells might divide every three
weeks. Different rates. The biopsy examination looks at the cells of the
sample and can detect how many of them are in the process of cell
division. If the sample shows that 10% of the cells are in the process of
cell division, and that type of cell ought not to show more than 1% of
them going through cell division, then that sample shows abnormal growth
Even though cancer is considered
abnormal and rapid growth of cells, the entire mass of a cancer is
normally rather slow growing -- because it is "encased." It grows inside
a wall, or shell. The body is trying to protect itself from the cancer --
because cancer would otherwise spread throughout the body. So, the body
tries to protect itself by building a wall around the cancer to keep any
of its cells from "leaking out." (Actually, some cancers are very
slow-growing [breast and prostate] while others are very fast [liver
The least dangerous type of cancer is
usually considered "skin cancer," or "basal cell carcinoma." This type of
cancer hardly ever spreads through the body. It "spreads" by just
affecting the tissue right next to it -- and growing that way. For this
reason a biopsy of basal cell carcinoma is not dangerous at all -- but, of
course, you don't know it is basal cell carcinoma until you do the
biopsy. An experienced doctor can usually tell by inspection and a
history from the patient whether or not it is skin cancer. Generally,
these are safely removed with simple surgery, and even if some of the
cancer cells are "missed" there is no need for radiation or chemotherapy
-- just a bit more surgery to get the remaining cancer cells.
When the cancer DOES leak out there is a
special word -- the cancer is said to metastasize -- start
spreading into other parts of the body. It grows like an octopus --
reaching its tentacles throughout the body.
Not only are these cells multiplying rapidly, but they have developed new
structures that enable them to penetrate into new areas and cause cancer
Note that you could treat cancer with
something that would prevent the rapid cell growth, or you could treat
cancer with something that would prevent it from penetrating into new
areas. Both types of technologies would be valid, and both are the subject
of continuing research. But, all that research is to find a drug, a
poison, that can do one or both of these things. They will not find a
toxin that can remove a toxin.
The doctors all know that a biopsy does
this, but there is a special reason why they don't tell you that a biopsy
is likely to cause the cancer to start spreading.
They will tell you that the biopsy is
painless, not expensive, and that it can be done during an office visit.
They will tell you that it is covered by insurance.
They will tell you that if there is
cancer in this lump, it is vital that you know about it so that you can
start treating it quickly. They will tell you that if you start treating
it quickly the chances of winning the battle over cancer are tremendously
They will explain, in detail, the "fine
needle biopsy," where the needle is tiny, and is inserted through the
flesh into the lump, a very small amount of material is withdrawn into the
needle, and there will be no scar -- no pain.
If there is cancer there, of course,
they will then tell you that you should move VERY quickly to start
treatment. You may not realize it, but there are only three legal
treatments for cancer in most of the US. The
laws of California make it a serious case of "unprofessional conduct"
for a doctor to diagnose cancer and then treat it with anything other than
the approved methods -- chemotherapy, radiation or surgery. He can lose
his license to practice medicine. He could even go to jail.
So, you discover the lump. You go to
your doctor. No doctor would ever recommend AGAINST a biopsy -- he must
be safe or he can lose his license and perhaps millions of dollars in a
malpractice lawsuit. So, he tells you, "You need a
biopsy, right away. They are safe and not painful. I can do it right
now." or, he says, "Go see Dr. Smith,
dermatologist, he can do a biopsy in his office, immediately."
We are all hoping, at this point, that
it is NOT cancer. The doctor may even say, "Well it
doesn't look malignant to me, I don't think it's cancer, but it's better
to be safe than sorry. Get the biopsy to find out."
Here is what he DOES NOT tell you BEFORE
the biopsy: "Once you have had the biopsy, if the
doctor finds that there is cancer, then you must start your treatment
Even if he tells you before the biopsy that you would
have to start treatment immediately, he won't tell you "WHY." The
reason, he will admit if you ask, is that the biopsy, itself, can start
the spread of the cancer from the inside of the casing it was in.
Remember, the body is protecting itself from having the cancer spread --
it builds a wall around the cancer. Once you penetrate that wall, even
with a very tiny needle, the cancer cells (they are certainly smaller than
the needle) can leak out through the hole and enter the body. These
cancer cells can enter the blood stream and within a few seconds they have
been distributed throughout the entire body.
Perhaps your immune system is strong
enough to handle these stray cancer cells. Perhaps they just won't find a
good place to "live." But, perhaps you have just allowed the doctor to
cause the metastasizing of your cancer.
Obviously if the leak continues for only
a day or so it is much less dangerous than if the leak of those cancer
cells continues for weeks or months. So, the doctor does the biopsy,
discovers cancer, and then tells you that you must start treatment
immediately. I think it is medical malpractice for a doctor to fail to
warn a patient that a biopsy can cause an immediate spreading of the
cancer, and that such "spreading" then would appear to greatly limit your
choices of treatment.
What had been, possibly, a slow growing
cancer with no metastasis, has in one split second become a cancer which
might be spreading throughout your body -- calling for urgent and
immediate treatment. Before the biopsy it was a suspicious mass and you
had time to learn about the many alternatives to chemotherapy, radiation
Is there a safe method of detecting
cancer? A cautious "yes" is the answer.
Click here for an explanation of alternative, non-invasive, testing
methods, including ultra sound.
The New Dawn Has Arrived!
We hear about this and that remedy and
treatment, but wouldn't it be great to have a simple test that would prove
whether or not some treatment is actually working? Whether or not you
really needed it. And, what if that test were absolutely safe???? I've
written, previously, about this test for detecting blockage in the
arteries. But, it can also tell is the various organs in your body are
larger than they should be, or irregular in shape or texture. These are
the signs of cancer with this test.
How could you "look" into the arteries
and find out whether they are blocked or not?
The bats that fly through the night have the technology -- and have had it for millions of years! Click here to read how bats "see" at night.
The bat, as most people know, "sees"
with sound. He sends out a "sound wave." It hits various objects and
bounces back. He receives these returning sound waves and has developed,
over the millions of years, the ability to detect flying insects as
different from pebbles, etc. This is sometimes referred to as the
"Doppler" effect, after
Doppler who demonstrated it more than 100 years ago. The marriage
between "Doppler" technology and "ultrasound" is well
If a bat, flying at a rather high rate
of speed, can "see" a housefly, also flying along, and swoop down to eat
it, don't you think science would like to duplicate that ability. Well,
of course, they did. It was NASA, the National Aeronautic and Space
Administration, many years ago, that financed research into this
technology, and came up with a great deal of useful information that has
now been transformed into many commercial applications.
Click here to read about NASA's research in this area.
Ultrasound To The Rescue!
This technology has had a few different
names -- "ultrasound," and "sonograms" are two of those.
You may know of "sonograms" as the very
common method now used by pregnant women to find out what sex their unborn
child is. In fact this is such a fad that many parents will even
"publish" the "pictures" of their unborn child on the web for the world to
Click here, for instance, to see a typical sonogram picture -- in this
case of a fetus shown sucking its thumb.
The sonogram CAN also detect cancer.
Doctors may say that it is not accurate -- or may say anything. There may
be better alternative non-invasive detection tests for cancer, but
biopsies don't fit for an acceptable test.
When you look at this picture of the
fetus you might think that it is fuzzy and not very "accurate," but the
wonderful world of science can turn the sound wave, when it returns to the
transmitting device, into a digital picture and greatly improve the
quality of the picture. And, when people are trained on what to look for
they can see, instantly, details in these pictures that you might not,
Echocardiography is similar in technique to sonar, which is used at sea
to determine depth and location of underwater objects. Pulses of sound
can be transmitted into the chest by means of small device placed on the
skin. (This is harmless, high frequency "ultrasound" which cannot be
heard by human ears.) The different echoes returning from the surfaces
of the heart and other structures are then electronically plotted and
recorded. These signals create an echocardiogram, a graphic image of the
heart and blood vessels. This can yield useful information about these
structures, such as the size, shape and motion of the heart chambers and
great vessels and the motion of the heart valves. (Source)
Click here for a summary page on ultrasound devices and technology.
That's about it for now -- a quick study
of several different ways to look inside the body. Now, I'd like to take
you "deeper" into the subject of the "gold standard" of testing for heart
disease -- that is the "angiogram" used for detecting heart problems, not
for cancer, however. But, see how dangerous this test is anyway.
The most common test for heart disease
angiogram and I want to compare that test with ultrasound in terms of
risk, cost and accuracy. In fact this article includes a full set of 100
scientific studies that compare the angiogram with ultrasound.
here for the summary page on angiograms.
I think "ultrasound"
is the test that the world needs, and I'd like to tell you more about it.
As often is the case, there is a villain in this story. But,
surprisingly, it is not that ultrasound is considered worthless by the
medical establishment. On the contrary, traditional doctors are using
ultrasound with great fervor -- it's just that they have figured out how
to use ultrasound in such a way that YOU can't get the best use of it.
I am continuing my research into
"chemical markers" that will identify cancers accurately. More another
day, or another page.
If you have gone down that bad path,
with a biopsy, and the doctor says, "I'm sorry, but you have cancer!"
The most common treatment is
chemotherapy -- poison that is supposed to kill cancer cells, but not the
other cells. You'll see that this is a lie. One of the most common of
experiences many have is to recall a mother or grandmother who had
chemotherapy and how terrible it was. She got bald and sick.
You too can look beautiful, though
bald! They must have paid this woman a lot to smile for this pose??
Get your dose of chemo, lose your hair,
lose weight, smile for the camera, then go home and die!
Since cancer is such a huge industrial
complex it attracts many different profit-seekers. To make money in our
free enterprise system is laudable, but to take in money while
deliberately making and selling a product you know is worthless? That is
an immoral act, even if not illegal.
When the "worthless" product or service
is worse than worthless, but harmful, there has to be a new level of
description to the immorality of THOSE profit-seekers.
The cancer industry is rigged just now
-- with much of the money being thrown at it from government or non-profit
groups who have no clue on what is a legitimate direction for research to
go. The crime is compounded when the drug companies (usually) that
receive grants and research money have to satisfy a bureaucrat, not Don
Jones, consumer with cancer.
This area is also so rife with false
information that consumers generally have no clue.
Compound this all, further, with laws
that make certain approaches to cancer cure the ONLY legal methods,
stripping away the licenses from any doctors who dare use some unapproved
method -- even if it works. A good friend of mine,
Jimmy Keller, went to jail because he was curing cancer.
There is much to cover in the area of
harmful treatments for cancer.
Let me start with a historical note. If
you would care to read how we became so dependent on drugs for our health,
click here and read about Jesus Christ versus Dr. Wundt. Dr. Wundt
won that battle, with the help and money of John D. Rockefeller, and the
"science" was born that man is an animal, that his body depends on
chemical balances, and that health can be achieved by just putting the
right chemicals into the body.
Rockefeller devised a
plan to give away his money in such a way that he could "have" it in
even greater amounts -- and at the same time, for good measure, destroy
American education and also destroy the American health system --- then
based almost exclusively on "homeopathy."
The game plan was
simple: here was all this Rockefeller money, and here was Mr.
Rockefeller being constantly badgered, scrutinized, and hauled into
court; why not set up a monopoly on philanthropy, funnel into it large
sums from the fortunes of Rockefeller and the other industrial barons,
and distribute the money in a way guaranteed to ensure Mr. Rockefeller
the respect and admiration of those elements of society which had
castigated him most? In other words, it was time to launder the
-- Chapter 6)
Here is, finally,
where money flowed toward Wundt's protégés, and Wundt psychology began
to overtake American education and culture.
The evil of Dr. Wundt and Rockefeller
has brought about acceptance of the
man-from-mud theories of the origin of life, and the related concept
that because man arose from a sea of chemicals, then
chemicals are what we need to repair the body. This a Godless science
that is false and harmful to life.
The generally accepted theory of cancer
holds that cells which should divide and multiply at some particular rate,
instead start multiplying and dividing at a much, much faster rate.
Thus, if some cell in the body, perhaps
in the liver (?), generally multiplies, as old cells die, at the rate of
about once ever 120 days? If those cells start multiplying at a rate of
every 5 days, that mass of cells starts to grow and take up more space
than is allotted. If some of those cells "leak out" of wherever they are,
travel through the blood stream, and stop in the armpit, for instance,
they might start multiplying THERE. Suddenly cancer is everywhere.
What caused the cells to multiply so
rapidly? The truth is it was free radicals. But, doctors will tell you
that it isn't known for sure, and ignore free radical causation. Why?
Because a drug cannot prevent free radicals from causing cancer. (My
chelation formulas DO THIS!)
general solution is to find, or better to create by man, some toxin or
poison, or drug (all the same!) which is special. This would be a drug
which interrupts or stops the action of cells multiplying. The scientists
are very proud because they have figured a type of drug that doesn't harm
normal cells, but DOES stop their multiplication.
The image on the left is a manufactured
toxic substance, carefully designed to kill ONLY certain living cells. It
is, indeed, a complicated science to design something to kill in the name
They know that all types of cells need
to be able to multiply, but they figure that when that cell from the liver
is supposed to multiply every 120 days, but now is doing it in 4 days --
they figure they can stop the liver cells from multiplying and stop the
Why? Because even though the drug will
ALSO stop a normal liver cell from multiplying, they only multiply every
120 days. But the drug will stop all those fast-growing cells, the
"malignant liver cells" from multiplying too. Since they are multiplying
every 4 days, not 120 days, they figure they can afford to kill the small
number of normal cells (multiplying during a short part of the cycle of
every 120 days) in order to kill those trying to multiply every 4 days.
That is the theory of most cancer
treatments. Kill the bad cells!
Drug companies get very, very creative
when it comes to finding new ways to kill living cells.
Even the most promising of cancer
research subjects are being attacked because the remedies being researched
are new drugs, not the natural remedy found in my oral chelation formulas.
cancer-treatment compounds, known as proteasome inhibitors, block cell
machinery used to digest unwanted proteins. But the researchers, led by
Susan Lindquist, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, said using such compounds in mice helped produce
brain-wasting symptoms. (source)
The various groups who get all this
money? You would think their sources of funding would dry up if it turned
out that cancer death rates are going UP! The rates are going up. So,
these groups simply lie about the statistics. It is that simple!
years ago I wrote about the harm being done by the American Heart
Association -- recommending a diet, for instance, that exactly causes
heart disease. The AHA also spends billions of dollars on so-called
"research" to find the causes of heart disease and the remedies. They
have failed miserably. They couldn't admit that.
So, what did they do? They simply lied
about the statistics. This amazing fact was reported by the Wall Street
Journal. It wasn't even a clever investigative reporter who "found out."
It was nothing more complicated than that the President of the American
Heart Association admitted, in public, that the statistics put out by the
AHA had been false for many years and that instead of the death rate going
DOWN? It was going up! That full report is
These people lie for money. Click on
the image to read that full report.
In other words, all the billions spent
on research by the AHA had not only been wasted, but their failures had
been hidden and as the President of the AHA admitted, in public, as
reported by the WSJ, the statistics were false so that the AHA could
continue to get more free money for research.
Now, it is revealed that the same has
happened in the "cancer industry."
Again, it is the Wall Street Journal
that breaks this news, yet other media have not picked it up. Why is that?
Wall Street Journal, on October 16, 2002, had a well-positioned
article that revealed the ugly truth.
isn't winning the war on cancer after all.
to optimistic reports from the National Cancer Institute showing the
incidence of several devastating cancers has leveled off or even
declined in recent years, rates for at least some of those cancers has
been rising, according to a new analysis by NCI scientists. (source)
Chemotherapy is a theoretical dumbness!
This is the treatment where the doctor
is going to cut it off, burn it with radiation, or poison IT and you with
toxic chemotherapy. That is the main stream of terrible therapy.
But, they can get worse.
The worse ones are the clinics who
"encourage" you to look at alternatives. They will even tell you how many
people are looking into alternatives, and suggest some, such as this:
many as 70 percent of cancer patients use alternative therapies,
including dietary supplements, acupuncture, hypnotism, massage, guided
imagery, magnets and biofeedback, according to a recent report in The
Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. The study, a
telephone survey of more than 350 cancer patients in Washington state,
found that breast cancer patients were the group most likely to try
holistic approaches and that almost all respondents believed the
treatments improved their well-being. Other studies have also shown that
alternative medicine use is common among people with life-threatening
Now that the doctor seems to be your
friend, telling you that you should certainly look at alternative forms of
cancer treatment, he then recommends the most bizarre methods. The doctor
will pat your head, say soothing words, but you get the message. The
women who pursue these alternatives never make it, or they are so few that
it is not worth the risk.
Safer it is to cut if off, burn it out,
or kill it with chemo.
Drug companies are constantly trying to
invent new drugs. They do. People are desperate for the "new thing." Even
if there is no proof that it works, they know the old treatments don't
work, so they demand the new ones.
Some of the new procedures have been
terribly harmful, and then discovered to be fraudulent, even among cancer
A study that influenced the use of a controversial
treatment for women with advanced breast cancer has been retracted
because it included bogus data.
Breast Cancer Study Based on Bogus
By Sarah Adler
April 26 — Fraudulent data have forced the largest U.S. organization of cancer
experts to retract a breast cancer study that influenced cancer
treatment throughout the world, and led to a stream of other research
trying to duplicate or add to the findings.
“This study made an
enormous financial impact on the practice of treating breast cancer in
this country,” said Dr. Raymond Weiss, clinical professor of medicine at
Georgetown University in Washington. He performed an audit of the
original study that is being published along with the retraction.
were significantly influenced by this paper and began paying for [this
treatment] whereas they had been denying coverage for this procedure
previously,” Weiss said.
in 1995 by the Journal of Clinical Oncology, the official journal
of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the study supported the
use of high-dose chemotherapy followed by a bone marrow transplant for
advanced breast cancer.
The medical journal
retracted the study today, the first such move in its 18-year history.
In the original study,
Dr. Werner Bezwoda, the top chemotherapy expert in Johannesburg, South
Africa, reported that he had found that high-dose chemotherapy and the
subsequent bone marrow treatment prolonged survival, compared to
conventional chemotherapy and bone marrow treatment, for metastatic
breast cancer — or advanced cancer that has spread from the breast to
other parts of the body.
But an official audit
of the study, commissioned by the University of Wittswatersrand, where
Bezwoda was on staff until his firing last year, and the Medical
Research Council of South Africa, revealed phony data regarding the
safety and efficacy of such treatment. (source)
Not all research is flawed. I have a
great deal of information on this web about Garry F. Gordon, MD, who
indicates that the use of oral chelation will prevent cancer.
Click here to read more about him. Since he is a medical doctor, he
has a great deal of information about prevention and cure of cancer with
other modalities besides oral chelation. But, oral chelation is his basic
He travels widely and finds other
doctors who he recommends, including the following:
In screenees who
received our tumor marker combination assay, the abnormal tumor marker
levels were restored io normal by our primary cancer prevention program
in a relatively short term. This change indicated a reduction in
the risk for cancer. As a result of this prevention program, no cancer
has occurred among the screenees since 1986. (Source)
This research is being done in Japan,
not the US. The best research work on cancer is generally NOT done in the
US, as the best medical treatments are never found in the US -- but
offshore where there is no FDA to stifle truth.
Generally it is a non-drug approach that
is mostly being researched and tested outside of the US, while within the
US, only DRUGS that kill are getting the big bucks of research attention.
There are other "new" drugs that harm.
Here is a letter I got from Sue about
one of the new drugs:
I have written to you
before about my cancer.
I get your newsletters
every week and have been on Taheebo tea for a while.
I do feel better on it
and was remaining fairly stable .. (the biggest tumor in my liver only
grew 1 cm in a year), however, the oncologist suggested that I try the
newest and latest for my very rare cancer (carcinoid) because of the
from my husband decided to try it. It is a drug called
Sandostatin (really, a hormone which we all
make anyway) but unfortunately did not respond very well to that
medicine .. (feel very weak and shaky).. I ended up with MAJOR blood
clots in my mesenteric and portal vein arteries, admitted to hospital
(where at least 50 docs couldn't agree on a bleeping thing) (sorry, I'm
disgusted) and had to start on heparin and now have to give myself two
shots of Lovenox a day. (a drug like heparin).
Needless to say
I'm pretty much a bruised up, weak, shaky, feeling yucky all the time
lady. At this point I really wanted to come off of the medicine because
I thought that this is what caused the clots but while none of them
could say it didn't come from the clots, none of them could say it did.
UGH AND UGH! They are (of course) hanging out my room door (very
soberly) talking amongst themselves where I could hear about 4th stage
carcinoid cancer, blah, blah and double blah. (source)
She may recover, but she certainly took
a turn for the worse when quit using the alternative that was helping (Taheebo
Life Tea) and went to what her doctor urged her to try -- Sandostatin.
Incidentally, Taheebo Life Tea had been, I thought, my best suggestion for
treating cancer until the new research showed me that my own oral
chelation formulas have been preventing cancer for almost 20 years and I
didn't know it.
Cut It Off!
you couldn't kill it, cut it off! That is the next step of the three
harmful therapies used, by law, to cure cancer. That doesn't much work
either. The most common form of cancer for women is breast cancer.
One of the
longest-running studies of breast-cancer treatments in the U.S. shows no
gain in survival rates for women who underwent radical mastectomies
compared with those who received less-extensive surgeries. (Source)
Repeating the false claim from above,
there are still thousands of doctors for whom "cutting it off" is the
exactly right solution.
This slash approach doesn't usually get
all the cancer. Instead a few cells are left behind. They start growing
again, but they are probably small and it may take several years before
they get big enough to notice. That is why even after radical surgery the
doctors will usually recommend chemotherapy and/or radiation.
When it comes to cutting, the woman's
breast is the number one target. Woman's breast cancer is the most common
Click here for an explanation of the terrible treatments of breast
Don't do it!
Radiate It To Death!
the false claim from above, there are still thousands of doctors for whom
"cutting it off" is the exactly right solution.
There are thousands of medical clinics
still telling this lie:
combination of breast conserving surgery and radiation therapy has been
established as a safe and effective alternative to mastectomy for many
women. Breast conserving surgery removes the area of cancer in the
breast along with a surrounding margin of normal breast tissue. This is
then followed by radiation therapy to the remaining breast tissue. (source)
While the truth is here.
Radiation has proven to be not
Radiation has been shown
in some studies to prevent breast cancer from returning in the short term,
but it may actually increase the risk of dying from other causes.
Researchers reviewed 40 studies that followed nearly 20,000 women.
prevented breast cancer from returning in about two thirds of the women.
When the results of all studies were combined, radiation did not improve
the death rate from breast cancer during the first 2 years after
treatment. After 2 years, women who underwent radiation were about 13%
less likely to die from breast cancer each year.
But the benefits of
radiation came with a cost, in that the death rate from other causes was
actually 21% higher in women who underwent radiation. Researchers
speculate that the increase in heart disease may be caused by radiation
damage to the heart and arteries.
Researchers state that
for women under 50 whose cancer has spread to the lymph nodes, "There's
a modest benefit (of radiation)." But for women whose cancer has not
spread to the lymph nodes, whose risk of a relapse of breast cancer is
low, the benefits of radiation are small, improving survival odds by
less than 1%.
For older women whose
cancer has spread to the lymph nodes, making a decision about radiation
is difficult, since older women already have a greater risk of heart
disease, and radiation treatment may increase this risk even more,
possibly outweighing any benefits of the treatment. (source)
Here is a book by a medical doctor:
Hypothesis-1: Medical radiation is a highly important cause (probably
the principal cause) of cancer mortality in the United States during
the Twentieth Century. Medical radiation means, primarily, exposure by
xrays (including fluoroscopy and CT scans).
Hypothesis-2: Medical radiation, received even at very low and
moderate doses, is an important cause of death from Ischemic Heart
Disease; the probable mechanism is radiation-induction of mutations in
the coronary arteries, resulting in dysfunctional clones (mini-tumors)
of smooth muscle cells. (source)
Do It The Right Way!
The above covered the wrong ways to
handle cancer. I could go on for thousands more pages. The statistics are
grim. The government figures are false, the recommended treatments don't
work, but cause harm, and people don't know what to do.
Here is the proper solution:
ONE of the Vibrant Life formulas is
called Life Glow Basic. It is well suited to taking as a cancer
prevention supplement. You should take six capsules per day to equal
about the amount in one day's intravenous infusion of EDTA, as done in
Switzerland. YOU could take only two per day on a continuing basis and
develop a fantastic resistance to any cancer. Click anywhere within the
image to jump to a page that describes this product.
had been selling the oral chelation concept for more than 15 years. I
have, now, more than 20,000 pages on the 19 web sites.
Only recently did I read a study that
just blew me away.
The very same formula that I've been
selling to handle the free radicals that cause heart disease? These
formulas handle free radicals in the same way, but in different areas of
the body -- these other free radicals are the ones that cause cancer.
If my formula can remove the metals that
cause heart disease, then the very same process (my oral chelation
formulas) remove the meals that cause cancer.
The mechanics are rather different, but
the original causation is the same -- the presence of "bad metals" in the
No drug can remove these metals. Only
chelation can remove them.
Here is the block-buster news that blows
open the door to cancer prevention with a technology proven over many
I did not realize it, but the thousands
of my customers who have been singing the praises of Life Glow Plus, Super
Life Glow or Life Glow Basic ??? These same customers didn't even know
it, but they were being protected against cancer.
It would be impossible to go back and
measure the rate of cancer in these thousands of people, compared to the
cancer rate among similar people who did not take my formulas. I am
confident I have arrived at a logical and hopeful conclusion.
My oral chelation formulas remove a
particular type of metal that is found, with billions of dollars worth of
cancer research, to cause cancer. Drug companies are spending billions
of dollars on something called "matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors." That
is a very big word and phrase. I have hundreds of pages of research and
studies on this new subject but am not ready to publish it. I do
understand it, however, and I am confident that the very same components
in my formulas remove the metals that cause heart disease and also cancer.
Click on the image above to read abut
Super Life Glow.
So, the same formulas I have been
selling for years? Yes, you can now get the additional benefit of
And, even if you don't worry about heart
disease, you can start taking my oral chelation formulas on a preventive
For that purpose the Life Glow Basic
seems ideal. It costs very little. You could take from two to six
capsules per day and get a fantastic reduction in the risk of cancer. The
famous Dr. Garry F. Gordon is taking the equivalent of 12 Life Glow Basic
capsules per day -- as am I, Karl Loren.
I will be publishing much more research
on this, but don't wait. Start preventing cancer now.
One of the primary validations for this
new concept is Garry F. Gordon, MD. Garry is probably the most famous
doctor in all of intravenous chelation. He had the second largest IV
clinic in the world, then quit the doctors group because they would not
even allow him to present his information about the effectiveness of oral
He has thoroughly validated oral
chelation as a prevention for cancer. I have an entire web site devoted
to his materials, including a place where you can download his taped
There is this about Garry:
Dr. Gordon received his Doctor of Osteopathy in 1958 from
the Chicago College of Osteopathy in Illinois. He received his Honorary
MD degree from the University of California Irvine in 1962 and completed
his Radiology Residency from Mt. Zion in San Francisco, California in
1964. For many years, he was the Medical Director of Mineral Lab in
Hayward, California, a leading laboratory for trace mineral analysis
worldwide. Dr. Gordon is on the Board of Homeopathic Medical Examiners
for Arizona and is Co-Founder of the American College for Advancement in
Medicine (ACAM). He is Founder/President of the International College
of Advance Longevity (ICALM) and Board Member of International Oxidative
Medicine Association (IOMA). With Morton Walker, DPM, Dr. Gordon
co-authored The Chelation Answer. He is advisor to the American Board
of Chelation Therapy and past instructor and examiner for all chelation
physicians. He is responsible for Peer Review for Chelation Therapy in
the State of Arizona. As an internationally recognized expert on
chelation therapy, Dr. Gordon is now attempting to establish standards
for the proper use of oral and intravenous chelation therapy as an
adjunct therapy for all diseases.
What was the new information I got that
excited me so much?
Here is is:
1958, a lengthy study was conducted in Switzerland on 231 adults who
lived near a well-traveled highway and had a higher rate of cancer
mortality than other people in the same city that lived in traffic-free
areas. The study group also suffered from a higher incidence of nervous
disorders, headaches, fatigue, gastrointestinal disorders, depression
and substance abuse. The researchers suggested that their symptoms might
be due to a higher level of exposure to lead from automobile exhausts.
Then, in 1961, 59 patients from this group received ten or more EDTA
chelation treatments served as control subjects. An eighteen-year
follow-up study of the group conducted by Walter Blumer, M.D. of Nestal,
Switzerland revealed that only one of the 59 treated patients died of
cancer (1.7 percent) as compared to thirty deaths (17.6 percent) from
cancer among the non-treated subjects. This is a 90 percent reduction of
mortality from cancer. Dr. Blumer found that death from atherosclerosis
was also reduced among the treated patients. His findings were based
upon Swiss death certificates and statistical evidence showing that EDTA
chelation therapy was the only significant difference between the
control group and the treated patients. (source)
this new and exciting information.
Dr. Garry F. Gordon talks a great deal
about cancer in his recorded lectures. You can download some of these,
free, from my web site
HERE. I have written NOTES on some of these lectures while I was
listening to them. You can read about the tremendous importance of
handling inflammation to prevent both cancer and heart disease
HERE -- from Dr. Gordon. He recommends a product sold by Vibrant Life
-- called "FYI" -- "For Your Inflammation."
Buy that by
The FULL new science on preventing
cancer (as well as heart disease and other degenerative diseases) is on