by Lois Zinn
Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud, and that the majority of cancer research organizations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them.
-Linus Pauling
Recently, I heard a 12-year-old raising money for the Alex's Lemonade Stand charity exclaim on local radio that "childhood cancer stinks" as he asked listeners to dig into their pockets for a good cause. A few days later at a street fair, I saw a teenage girl manning a table for the American Cancer Society crying, "Cupcakes for a cause." It struck me that despite good intentions and a heart of gold, this young man and woman, like so many people, have been fooled into believing that cancer organizations are winning the war against cancer. The people "fighting" cancer are winning only in the sense that they are making tremendous profits for themselves. Cancer patients following their lead, however, are doing as poorly as ever, and the disease is reaching epidemic proportions.
My distrust for mainstream cancer medicine goes far back, stemming from the helplessness I felt watching my 58-year-old mother lose her life to the disease in 1981. Mom put on a brave front, but suffered terribly before her demise. I always wondered whether her unfortunate death was a result of the cancer or the "cure."
Then in the 1990's, I worked with health advocate Gary Null, transcribing tapes from his radio broadcasts and helping to edit several of his books. I read scores of testimonials from people given terminal cancer diagnoses, alive and well years later only because they bolted from the institutions that gave them death sentences, running instead to independently-minded medical doctors with good track records. I found this inspiring, and it made an indelible impression on my mind.
Today's standard cancer therapies, with their origins in late 19th and early 20th century practices, have not advanced much beyond their beginnings. Surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy were then, as now, the law of the land, and the success rate of these methods has been greatly inflated by statistical methods. In oncology, people surviving five years or more are considered cured. If cancer is found in another part of their system in five years and a day, statistics will still say they are cured of their original cancer. Moreover, cancers are detected earlier. Therefore, a larger period of time is allotted to the medical establishment to claim success, when, in reality, people often die at the same rate as previously. The only difference is earlier detection creates the illusion of longer survival. Additionally, if a person dies during the course of therapy, he or she is not included as a cancer death statistic. These tricks of the trade make success rates appear higher than they really are.
Patients are deceived, too, with ambiguous language, an Orwelian doublespeak, where carefully chosen words are used to mislead people into believing they are being helped when they are not. When a cancer doctor tells patients they are
responding to chemotherapy, it sounds as if they are improving. Not so. This term means that the tumor is shrinking temporarily, but almost certain to return. When an oncologist says a treatment is
palliative, patients are told this means the treatment is making them more comfortable without poisoning them. Among themselves, however, oncologists use the term to mean partial treatment with an inability to cure.
Doctors who dare to recommend approaches other than surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation risk harassment, losing their licenses, going to jail, and even murder. The genius Max Gerson, who saved countless lives--longtime friend Albert Schweitzer, a patient himself, called Gerson the most eminent genius in the history of medicine--died suspiciously of arsenic poisoning just as his book
A Cancer Therapy: A Result of 50 Cases was about to be published.
In the documentary "A Beautiful Truth" (
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/beautiful-truth), a woman given a death sentence by the Mayo Clinic for Stage IV extra ovarian primary peritoneal carcinoma, a diagnosis no one has ever survived with conventional medicine, lives to tell her tale. Five years following treatment from the Gerson Clinic, she revisits her original oncologist, and he is astounded to see her alive. The woman asks her former doctor to state on film that the Gerson therapy has cured her. He is willing to do so, but the Mayo Clinic panics and calls the police, who whisk her away as if she were a terrorist. To his credit, the doctor subsequently quits the Mayo Clinic to help patients without such restrictions.
Actress Suzanne Somers, herself a cancer survivor, writes in her bestseller
Knockout about several doctors who have had to fight for their professional lives, including Dr. James Forsythe, a traditionally trained oncologist who became dismayed at losing so many cancer patients to standard care. For having shifted toward alternative approaches with far better results, he reaped the following reward; a not-so-friendly visit from government agents in 2005. Writes Somers:
Dressed in black flak jackets and with guns drawn, several federal agents prepared to knock down the door of his home with a battering ram, demanding to know if he kept guns in the house. He was treated like a criminal rather than one of America's most respected doctors; he was ordered to kneel and a gun was pushed to his forehead....Federal agents and prosecutors trashed his pristine reputation and tried to portray him in the news media as a sleazy doctor who employed questionable techniques. Years later, Dr. Forsythe was found innocent and allowed to continue caring for cancer patients.
Unfortunately, these cases are the rule rather than the exception, which is why doctors making a difference often leave the United States or keep a low profile. "Imagine what a difference we could make if the medical system embraced us," said Charlotte Gerson, who runs the clinic started by her father near Tijuana, Mexico.
Of course, not all patients choosing traditional care perish, nor does everyone going the nontraditional path survive. The road to recovery is a highly personal, intuitive choice, and one does the best they can with the information at hand. To make the best decision possible, it is imperative that this information be reliable. For the powers-that-be to give false data, use misleading language, hide information, and use bully tactics is unconscionable.
Cancer organizations distort the truth and report success for one reason only: Who would donate to an organization claiming continual failure? Says prominent cancer researcher Hardin Jones, Ph.D., "The more cures the press releases claim, the more money cancer organizations raise." Think about it. Since the 1950's, the war on cancer has garnered a lot of money with little to show for it. Regarding the message of the American Cancer Society, M. Dean Burk, a 34-year employee for the National Cancer Institute concluded, "They lie like scoundrels."
Lois Zinn is a reading specialist living in the Fair
Trade town of Media, Pennsylvania. She has edited for health advocate
Gary Null and now writes about her personal healing experiences in the
hopes of inspiring others. Lois can be reached at
loiszinn@hotmail.com.