Tom Van Flandern

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Claus</i>
<br />
The National Cancer Institute estimates cancer care in the U.S. costs ~$72 billion annually (2004). Furthermore, about $55 billion of cancer drugs are used annually, none which have not significantly improved survival rates throughout the history of their use.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Being only a patient, I don't have professional knowledge about the "alternative" approach described in the previous e-mail. Though, if the regimen considers cancer cells to be foreign entities, not cells of the patient, this is a bit suspect. Tumors are extremely common but the high majority are not cancerous. And they are not routinely rejected by the human immune system.

More troubling is the above claim that "mainstream" cancer drugs are not effective. This is patently not true. My wife was given cancer drugs immediately after surgery and has survived for sixteen years without any recurrence of the breast cancer. Her mother has the same success record for colon cancer. I have survived for four years with absolutely no evidence of any remaining thyroid cancer cells even at the microscopic level. They are easily detected by the administration of radioactive iodine followed by a radiation scan. A cousin shows no recorrence of leukemia after seven years.

The implication that there is a conspiracy against a successful cancer therapy - as described in the above email - does not seem plausible.

There is no question that oncologists may very well have tunnel vision, so alternative therapies should be investigated.

Gregg Wilson

Claus

I really have an open mind about alternate treatment, I went to the suggested link but could not find the free ebook, could you give me more specific directions?

My sister who I love dearly is a cancer sufferer and I want to research every avenue to help her

Regards

Alan

I feel as if I am a small boy holding but a teaspoon of knowledge standing before the Infinity Ocean of all knowledge

Dear Gregg,

I have no idea how you read into this that the regimen is grounded on the belief that cancer cells are foreign entities (i.e. originating outside the body)

As I understand it, what the immunological approaches to cancer are struggling with is, simply put, how to teach the "immune system" (in itself a fairly unknown and unexplored thing) to recognize and attack cancerous cells, one of the problems being that they are "self".

Perhaps you are objecting to the word "rejecting" the tumour, as in rejecting foreign matter as happens for instance in organ transplants. I've already mentioned that this was a popular article and an informal Email, so all terminology is not explained, perhaps not strictly adhered to either. However, if you find several referenced peer-reviewed papers, as well as named well-published specialists, seemingly making such a basic mistake, perhaps it is worth re-reading before jumping to conclusions.

Of course the body or "immune system" has ways of dealing with "self" cells that are pathogenic or mutating out of control. This is what the alternative approaches are about: How can the natural healing processes be radically augmented or enhanced once they've failed?

The statement that the cancer drugs are not effective is a sweeping statistical claim, not an anecdotal one. As someone mentioned further up, the success of any cancer drug is highly dependent on an early diagnosis and good drug tolerance by the patient. The main successes we've had in cancer treatment come from better diagnostic tools, not from the evolution of the drugs.

Of course there will have been some sort of learning curve, but please understand, Nixon's war on cancer is 40 years old, funding has run into the gazillions, shouldn't we expect a bit more if they had really been on the right track all these years?

For those who continue to believe that the research into diseases, their causes and cures is guided by "pure science" rather than entrenched vested interests (no need for a conspiracy here) should take just an ounce of the skepticism with which they view NASA and apply it to the most lucrative and self-contradictory of all industries: the medical-industrial complex.

Dear Alan,

I think we have all had experiences with cancer directly or indirectly - unfortunately. Through my work (as an editor) with Dr. Maniotis and others, I have been exposed to a lot of stuff about cancer which was only half comprehensible techno-babble to me. All I wanted to do was point to specific, related approaches, which make sense in theory and have shown good results when tested with the rigour of mainstream science.

I do think this is a fight we have to fight for ourselves. We cannot wait for the medical establishment to fumble its way through institutionalized conflicts of interest and the cult of bio-tech, while our loved ones are dying.

I cut the mail short because I didn't want to come across as trying to sell something (although it's free). The book mentioned is about the corruption of cancer research, not necessarily a guide to a cure. I will ask for a link that works and hopefully return with it if you are still interested.

Best regards

Claus

Hi Tom and Friends, Thankful to hear that there is a positive improvement in Tom's health. I wanted to share some thoughts regarding a diet regimin and some areas of research for beating this cancer. I would go to Costco and purchase the large box of oatmeal, get almonds, maybe walnuts, raisens, crushed flax seed-omega oils, cinnamin-regulates blood sugar, box of fresh strawberries if available or frozen blue berries. I eat a large bowl of oatmeal every morning with a cup of coffee. I would also purchase several containers of dark blue or red grapes with seeds-resveratrol is an antioxidant that will reverse aging in cells.
Dr. Wentz has partnered with the Linus Pauling Institute on a long term study on Resveratrol. [Although resveratrol can inhibit the growth of cancer cells in culture and in some animal models, it is not known whether high intakes of resveratrol can prevent cancer in humans. ( lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/phytochemicals/resveratrol/ )

I would eat a ton of dark grapes crushing the seeds.

While at Costco I would also purchase a juicer if you do not already have one. Read about detoxying body, the entire program at Sanoviv is organic and vegetarian during detox. They focus on gourmet live food which preserves compounds. Costco---buy a large bag of carrots and juice them regularly.

I would stay away from processed foods I think it was Jack Lalainne that said that statement. Look at his juicing books for advice, but again Sanoviv has the science based technical knowledge regarding why live foods and detox works.

I eat costco organic peanut butter and their multigrain bread with raisens for lunch. I do a lot of hard labor, I am building a new rental and recording and video production studio with control room/office. I also do a lot of surfing for hours and so that keeps me strong at 62 years of age.

Go for Salmon/steelhead from costco for protien. I would cut into small cubes and let maronate in fresh squeezed lemon, honey, ginger, pepper, and then simmer until cooked in sauces. Serve with large fresh salad and red potatoes. That is my favorite. I stay away from bacon, and fried food.

Some of my other favorites, black beans, barly is excellent side, and brown rice. Fresh steamed yellow and summer squash.

Now, this is my regimin and may not be appropriate for present condition. I would approximate all responses take it easy, but diet is part of the healing process and it is extremely important that this is well thought out.

Here are some other areas that I think need to be adressed: Nutritional Supplement Regimin-maintain high level of antioxidants in blood stream at all times --- supplement requirements for optimimun cellular regeneration, Heat treatments- get advice on this-heat kills cancer but does not kill normal cells, Oxygen treatments breathing-oxygen required for optimum cellular processes, Excersize go slow but pick up steam-short then long walks, I know that the standard medical establishment does not have a wholistic approach because they are ran by the pharmacuetical companies [push products on them] so my thoughts regarding their procedures are that they may be able to kill the cancer but do not have an intelligent science based cellular level support program to maintain optimum health. Some one in the family should contact Sanoviv-it is expensive but they may be of help at least as a resource and could assist in gaining greater understandings regarding potential for getting the cure. I would rather be at a health spa positive environment that has state of the art technologies and looks at the big picture, is science based, and is a world class research center then at a cold hard pharmaceutical supported medical center with cafeteria style food preparation and zero consideration for nutrition.

Thank God for the support of your family, and I sure wish you a wonderful Christmas. Please keep fighting, John

Ok, there are two books by Sam Epstein, a major one called "Cancer Gate", obviously the one dealing with corruption, and another one available on the Internet called "Stopping Cancer Before it Starts", dealing mostly with the idea that cancer is caused by environmental pollutants. I don't know how relevant it is in this context, but you can have a quick look:

www.stopcancer.org/pdf/bgpaper.pdf

Here's one of the claims:

<i>Forty years ago, one in four Ontarians was diagnosed with cancer, while one in five died from the disease. In 1999, the odds have worsened: one in three of us will get cancer at some point in our lifetime - one in two if we count non-melanoma skin cancers - and one in four will die from it.</i>

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Claus</i>
Of course the body or "immune system" has ways of dealing with "self" cells that are pathogenic or mutating out of control.
<hr noshade size="1">
This is news to me. Why doesn't the body reject benign tumors then?

Gregg
<hr noshade size="1">

<i>Originally posted by Claus</i>
[/The statement that the cancer drugs are not effective is a sweeping statistical claim, not an anecdotal one. As someone mentioned further up, the success of any cancer drug is highly dependent on an early diagnosis and good drug tolerance by the patient. The main successes we've had in cancer treatment come from better diagnostic tools, not from the evolution of the drugs.

<hr noshade size="1">
Based on my personal experience and that of several relatives, the above is not true at all. I will stick with experience.

Gregg
<hr noshade size="1">

<i>Originally posted by Claus</i>
For those who continue to believe that the research into diseases, their causes and cures is guided by "pure science" rather than entrenched vested interests (no need for a conspiracy here) should take just an ounce of the skepticism with which they view NASA and apply it to the most lucrative and self-contradictory of all industries: the medical-industrial complex.

<hr noshade size="1">
The medical-industrial complex? What industry? The slow down in the progress of medicine is with the government, not the market. I am not a fan of "conspiracies" because it gives way too much credit to the presumed conspirators. Try dogmatic, stubborn stupidity. The "not invented here" complex.

The government constitutes a monopoly. An open market is competitive. Pharmaceutical companies compete against one another. When one of them makes a major mistake, it costs them.

Gregg
<hr noshade size="1">


Best regards

Claus

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The correlation I have observed, <b>over and over again</b>, is that certain family (genetic) lines are highly vulnerable to cancer. Others are not. My direct family line has not had cancer in four generations, until it happened to me. Explanation: I worked in a plutonium mill and was chronically exposed to radioactive iodine, which goes only to the thyroid. My exposure to government environmentalism. Ho hum.


Gregg Wilson