by Mark David
Chemotherapy is one of the three mainstream cancer treatment methods that doctors are allowed to prescribe without being terminated from their profession and prosecuted in court. It has been in use for slightly more than 100 years, and introduces toxic chemicals into the body in an attempt to poison and kill cancer cells. Of course, this poison is also toxic to healthy cells, and has been found in studies to actually cause cancer as you will soon find out.
This genius idea of using large amounts of poison to treat cancer began in Germany during world war II, after it was discovered that chemical warfare agents such as mustard gas were effective at stopping cells from dividing. (44)
A 2014 study compared cancerous tissue with healthy tissue from the same person, and found that the cancerous tissue had a much higher concentration of toxic chemicals. Considering one of the primary causes of cancer is undoubtedly the virtually endless myriad of environmental chemicals we are exposed to everyday in our food, water, air, homes, cars and clothes, more poison is exactly the opposite of what the body needs to heal. Many doctors are aware of this, in fact, when scientists from McGill Cancer Center were sent a questionnaire to 118 cancer doctors to determine the degree of faith they had in the therapies they were administering, of the seventy-nine doctors that responded, 64 declared they would refuse chemotherapy for themselves.
But what about the people who receive chemotherapy and survive? The cancer industry has a dirty little secret that it doesn’t want you to know about. One very effective alternative form of cancer treatment that you’ll read about in this book is baking soda, and as Dr. Mark Sircus reveals in his book Sodium Bicarbonate: Nature’s Unique First Aid Remedy, mainstream oncologists administer intravenous sodium bicarbonate before, during and after chemotherapy and radiation treatments to neutralize the harmful effects of chemotherapy poison. In other words, when somebody survives cancer from chemotherapy or radiation treatment, research suggests that it is due to the baking soda and not the chemotherapy. How disturbing that this fact is hidden from us, and that a cancer patient has to get dosed with devastating poison in order to receive the medicine that their body needs.
How Toxic is Chemotherapy?
Just how toxic is chemotherapy? So toxic are the chemicals used in Chemotherapy, that nurses administering it have to wear personal protective equipment, and follow strict security measures in case of accidental spills.
To put it into perspective, the burnt and scarred hand that you see in the image on the right is the result of a nurse spilling chemotherapy fluid on a woman’s hand while attempting to administer it intravenously. Considering the skin of a person was designed to offer a layer of protection for the more sensitive internal organs and tissues, can you imagine what a chemotherapy injection does to the inside of a patient’s body?
The following, written in the book Now and Then by Bob Maddison, is how one woman described her experience with chemotherapy…
“This highly toxic fluid was being injected into my veins. The nurse administering it was wearing protective gloves because it would burn her skin if just a tiny drip came into contact with it. I couldn’t help asking myself “If such precautions are needed to be taken on the outside, what is it doing to me on the inside?” From 7 pm that evening, I vomited solidly for two and a half days. During my treatment, I lost my hair by the handful, I lost my appetite, my skin colour, my zest for life. I was death on legs.”
I don’t think anything more needs to be said to forever terminate most people’s faith in this treatment, but in the interest of full evidence-based disclosure of chemotherapy, let’s take a look what we can learn from nearly a century of experience using chemotherapy.
Scientific Research: What do We Know About Chemotherapy?
- A team of researchers at the Fred Hutchison Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington, conducted study in 2012 to investigate the negative impact chemotherapy treatment might have on the human body. Published in the scientific journal Nature in 2012, scientists found that by damaging healthy tissue in the body, chemotherapy stimulated both the growth and spread of cancer cells. Chemotherapy was found to be a cause of cancer, and what’s more, it was found to cause cancer cell resistance, enhancing the ability of cancer cells to defend themselves against future chemotherapy treatments. (2)
- In 2004, after analyzing a number of published studies from all over the world, Australian oncologists and researchers found that 97% of the time chemotherapy was completely ineffective. Stated differently, chemotherapy was an effective treatment for cancer only 3% of the time (or less). The study was published in Clinical Oncology (Volume 16, pages 549-560), and the unexpected results indicated that “The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA.” (3)
- Dr. Hardin B. Jones sent shockwaves through a seminar for the American Cancer Society in 1969, when he delivered the results of his 25-year study on chemotherapy survival rates. After investigating the lifespan of cancer patients for a full 25 years, the Professor of Medical Physics and Physiology of Berkeley, California, concluded that cancer patients who did not receive chemotherapy lived longer than those who did. “People who refused treatment lived for an average of 12 and a half years. Those who accepted other kinds of treatment lived on an average of only 3 years,” concluded Dr. Jones in his paper titled “Demographic Consideration of the Cancer Problem,” and published in Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences (Series II, Vol. 18, pp. 298-333). One of the most disturbing parts of his research was his discovery about the survival rates of women with breast cancer who refused all conventional treatments (chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery). His findings indicated that women with breast cancer who refused conventional treatment lived four times longer than those who were treated. (4)
Other researchers have conducted similar studies which came to similar conclusions. “Those who refused medical procedures had a lower mortality rate than those who submitted” concluded Dr. Maurice Fox, Biologist from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, based on a study completed at the Harvard School of Public Health. (5)
In the February 2, 1979 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, an article was published by Dr. Maurice Fox, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, on the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. Based on studies conducted at the Harvard School of Public Health, Dr. Fox found many things, including:
- Complete mastectomy was no better than simple lump removal.
- The diagnosis of breast cancer was twice as frequent in 1975 than in 1935, and the death rate was also double, meaning no progress had been made in the attempt to cure cancer.
- Less deaths were recorded among patients who refused medical procedures than those who submitted to conventional treatments.
- Early detection amounted to quicker treatment and earlier death.
An article titled “Failure of Chemotherapy to Prolong Survival in a Group of Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer,” was published in British medical journal The Lancet on March 15, 1980. Read what it says:
“Overall survival of patients with primary breast cancer has not improved in the past 10 years, despite increasing use of multiple-drug chemotherapy for treatment of metastasis. Furthermore, there has been no improvement in survival from first metastasis, and survival may even have been shortened in some patients given chemotherapy…. Actuarial survival analysis … reveals no prolongation in overall survival, despite the increased use of multiple-drug chemotherapy for metastatic disease. The survival of the 78 patients who received chemotherapy from first detection of metastases (including single-agent chemotherapy) was no better than that of the 80 who did not receive chemotherapy. There was also no improvement in survival for those who received multiple-drug chemotherapy (66 patients)…. The fact that regressions of breast cancer had no influence on overall survival must reflect the inadequacy of present-day chemotherapy.”
In his book The Healing of Cancer, Dr. Allen Levin, M.D. explains that “Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy.” He goes on to write “Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon, or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade, yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumors.”
Chemotherapy Out of Control
“If I contracted cancer, I would never go to a standard cancer treatment centrer. Cancer victims who live far from such centers have a chance.”
Professor Charles Mathe
“We have a multi-billion dollar industry that is killing people, right and left, just for financial gain. Their idea of research is to see whether two doses of this poison is better than three doses of that poison.”
– Glen Warner, M.D. oncologist.
As a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incomprehensible to me that physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good.”
– Alan Nixon, Ph.D., Past President of The American Chemical Society
So why do oncologists push chemo so hard? Well, it is because they make a tremendous amount of money doing it…
According to the research of Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner of Freakonomics fame, “Oncologists are some of the highest paid doctors, their average income is increasing faster than any other specialist in the medical field, and more than half their income comes from selling and administering chemotherapy.”
Yes you read that right. Oncologists make a huge profit, as much as two-thirds of their income in some cases, from chemotherapy drugs.
But nothing is going to change any time soon because hundreds of billions of dollars are being made.
- Article by Maurice Fox. February 2, 1979 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association
my sister died of liver failure and blind faith in Doctors. previously she removed 2 million dollars from their pockets for a miss diagnosis. Afterwards they passed a law capping settlements @ 1 million and not allowing mammogram imaging as evidence. They had mixed feelings about her, she never noticed.
Now they treat MERSA by comatosing patients in dark ICUs w/ machines while they heroically remove limbs. If I developed MERSA, (doubtful as I spend summers playing in dirt), I’d jump into a whirl pool bath w/ Epsom salt, crank the temp to 105 F. This is how sepsis was treated in the past. It’s like a full body sitz bath. Mineral lake swimming is good too. Sun takes pain away and a walk in pine forests is good for the lungs.