Posted on 05/26/2009 7:34:01 PM PDT by Scythian
(NaturalNews) If there's one thing that cancer doctors and health authorities can't stand, it's being wrong. And in the case of 13-year-old Daniel Hauser, the cancer doctors insist that unless the boy submits to chemotherapy as a "treatment" for Hodgkin's Lymphoma, he will almost certainly die.
But there's a problem with that claim. The problem is a man named Billy Best, now 31 years old, who was diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma at the age of 16. Like Daniel Hauser, Billy Best was told he would die if he didn't submit to chemotherapy. But with remarkable courage and wisdom about his own body's healing capabilities, Billy Best fled the health authorities, ran away from his family and began eating roots, superfoods and medicinal herbs. He regularly drank an alternative cancer liquid formula (made from plants) and before long his cancer was cured.
Billy, of course, is alive and well today... fifteen years after his cancer doctors said he should be dead.
Thank you for posting this.
bump read later
I agree with you about natural remedies. In 1997 my husband had a heart attack. At the
hospital, the heart doctor told me he put my husband on a magnesium drip while he
waited for the heart surgeon to arrive. They did an angioplasty that night. We take Magnesium
Glycinate everyday now. This kind of Magnesium doesn’t cause diarrhea. About three months
ago I started putting Magnesium Oil (Magnesium Chloride) on my husband’s feet and legs
every night. When he went for his heart checkup a month later, the doctor said his heart was doing
great. The best report from the
doctor that he’s ever gotten regarding his heart. I think the magnesium is the reason he hasn’t had a second heart attack.
http://www.winningcancer.com/txt/fundamental-methodology/
The first priority in our protocol is to address patients’ magnesium deficiencies. When it comes to healing and life itself, after the sun, the water we drink and the air we breathe, magnesium lives up to its billing as the miracle mineral that can save us in our time of desperate need. Called by the ancient Chinese the beautiful mineral its beauty is seen in the absolute healing power it contains. Magnesium holds the key for hundreds of crucial enzyme reactions and cellular processes. Magnesium chloride, when supplied in sufficient quantities, can kick start cell physiology in a very powerful way. Few know that magnesium chloride is an impressive infection fighter and even fewer know that the best way to deliver magnesium to all the cells is through the skin.
You are absolutely correct, if americans did two to three teaspoons a day of the CALM Magnesium I take (I make no money from it) heart attacks would drop by an incredible rate, and peoples health would greatly improve.
Don’t let your husband take L-Arginine, there are some reports that after a heart attack one shouldn’t take it, just stick with the mag. I also do CoQ10, check with your doctor and see what he thinks, and vitamin C, those who have heart attacks are low in C, CoQ10, and definitely Mag, all easily suplimented and very safe.
We both take 4,000 mgs. of Vitamin C a day. My doctor told me several years ago that it would lower cholesterol amd it does. Thanks for the advice about L-Arginine. I am definitely for natural remedies over drugs.
Yes, I understood not to give him L-Arginine. Thanks for the interesting link about your healing. Glad you’re doing well. I have the book, “Alkalize or Die” and try to follow the alkaline diet as much as possible. I hope other people will realize that drugs are not answer.
Cancer five then and fifteen year survival rates are up across the board as advances are made in the biological sciences and the treatment of cancer.
Try triple ply tinfoil, the mind control rays are still penetrating.
On Studying Cancer
“I am all for making an informed and well researched decision. And think most people who use alternatives are generally well informed on their treatments as well as their disease”—someone on Free Republic who wanted to go it alone in the treatment of his colon cancer.
The problem here is three-fold:1. The sense of desperation at being diagnosed with a life-threatening illness with no promise of a simple, pain-free cure can dispose people to grasp at straws.This is no put-down to these people, but just a statement of fact. And it's true for any question that presupposes both a certain level and breadth of knowledge of a particular topic, whether it's the engineering of coal-fired electrical plants, the hand-grinding of solid carbide surgical burrs, or restaurant management. The sheer amount of information (and disinformation) on the web on any subject is staggering. It takes much time and effort to get a sense of what is current in just one little area of one little area.
2. Most people lack both the knowledge and skill to read, to understand, and to interpret the papers that present the results of basic science research.
3. Most of the sources used by people who turn to the 'alternative' route are without scientific merit.
Suppose someone is diagnosed with colon cancer and he says he doesn't trust his doctor because all the doctor will recommend is surgery and he's in league with the surgeons to give them more work. Besides, the thought of surgery is really scary and is a positive confirmation both of the presence of a deadly disease as well as the patient’s own inability to do anything about it. Consequently, he says he's going to take the 'alternative' route to treatment and is going to research things on his own.
Since he's grown up hearing that a room full of monkeys, if given enough time, will by chance type the works of Shakespeare, he figures that there's bound to be something out there that will cure him. He's certainly smarter than a roomful of monkeys and, besides, if he doesn't try he'll never have the chance of bumping into the cure. You know, if you never play Lotto, you'll never win. Since he doesn't trust medical science because of its monetary self-interest, everything medical science says is suspect. Where does he go, then, for information? To those who sell alternative medications and procedures? But the same things can be said of them in terms of monetary self-interest. Does he type in 'colon cancer' AND 'cures' into some search engine on the web? If he does, he'll come back with almost 1.5 million web pages that would take years to read (Google, using the above criteria). But even then he has only scraped the surface and all the while the cancer is relentlessly progressing toward a more serious condition.
The lone researcher must still find some way of separating websites containing accurate information from those that are simply not factual and from those that are actively misleading. How will he do it? And simply being willing to conduct his own research will have no positive effect on the progression of his cancer. The tumor doesn't care about how hard the person it's on its way to killing is willing to work to become truly knowledgeable about it. It has its own timetable and set of conditions.
If the lone researcher wanted to go to the principal scientific journals in the field of medical research in general, cancer in particular, and colon cancer specifically, he would be faced with the same problem. If he went to PubMed, a resource of thousands of peer-reviewed journals in the fields of medical science, and entered 'colon cancer' AND ‘review’ into the PubMed Query in order to find articles that give an overview of the subject of colon cancer and the research being done on it, he would get a return of 2191 articles. And these are not the primary source papers.
If he just searched for 'colon cancer', he would get a return of 15,435 papers. The problem would still remain of how to learn sufficient background material (as well as techniques) in animal physiology, cancer biology, cell biology, genetics, human physiology, immunology, molecular biology, pharmacology, surgery, etc., to be able to understand what the papers are saying.
In addition, he would need enough experience to be able to read the papers and determine whether their results were arrived at in a way that others could independently reproduce. He would need to know how those results applied to males versus females, old versus young, with this or that complicating medical condition. Beyond that, he would still need the knowledge and experience to be able to judge whether the conclusions the researchers draw from their results were valid.
And finally, he would need some way to determine whether he is picking one thing and rejecting another because it does or does not appeal to what he has already decided he wants to be true.
Meanwhile, he's been diagnosed with a particularly deadly form of cancer that needs treatment now. What should he do?
The best thing, since he lacks time and expertise, is to go to people who have gone through all of the training mentioned above. These people are called medical doctors. Some of them specialize in the diagnosis of the disease; some, in the medical treatment of it; some, in the surgical treatment of it; some, in the radiological treatment of it. They work together to pool their knowledge in the subject as it applies to one specific person and try to find the most effective way of treating the disease in that individual. Thus the single individual becomes the recipient of the benefits of hundreds of thousands of hours of study and experience that he could not possibly get on his own.
Yes, sometimes doctors are wrong. They aren't gods. They don't know everything, even though some think doctors believe so. But they will be far more likely to know what to do in a given medical situation and to be worthy of one's trust than some clerk at a health food store proudly displaying his certificate in herbal bowelology he got mail order from The Center for Wholistic Healing.
You are entitled to your opinion and the medical care of your choice, as am I. I have found natural healing to be extremely powerful, and I’m not talking herbs here. But things like Magnesium, Amino Acids, Calcium, Potassium, Vitamin C, and so on, things the body actually needs, and when lacking, disease sets in, including heart disease (which isn’t a disease at all nor is plaque build up but they have named that a disease too). Anyway, bet of luck to you ...
“Oncology is one of the true success stories of modern medicine.”
The greatest success story of modern medicine is what can be done with surgery.
I can’t say that I have much use for the “cut, poison and burn” approach to disease treatment, moreso since Monopoly Medicine and big Pharma feel the need to force others (at gunpoint) to submit to their protocols. Someday maybe oncology (in its current form) will be viewed in the same way as use of mercury, encouragement to smoke and tonsillectomies.
Oncology has been a huge success story. Many cancers that were once a death sentence are now curable or treatable long term. Survivability of cancer patients is up across the board.
How would you explain this if you think oncology will go the way of the tonsillectomy? How do you explain the AMAZING efficacy of oncological treatment that keeps getting better and better?
and so, as awful as the chemo treatments were...it killed his cancer..the roots and veggies had nothing to do with it.
Right...but roots and veggies are a more romantic story!
“The best thing, since he lacks time and expertise, is to go to people who have gone through all of the training mentioned above. These people are called medical doctors.”
And there in lies the problem. Doctors are NOT experts in treating cancer. Not even the oncologists. What they ARE experts in is doing exactly what the drug companies want them to do and knowing exactly what the drug companies want them to know. M.D. in the industrialized world basically means” Mostly Drug pusher.” It’s not the doctor’s fault but they are NOT in control. The pharmaceutical companies are. Chase the money and look and ye shall find.
If you really want to go to an expert, go to a licensed naturopathic physician. They get much more training in human biochemistry and how the body actually heals itself and what it needs to do so.
You are right in the fact that when you actually are faced with cancer, trying to do all the research at once with no training in how to understand what you are reading. Granted. Unfortunately you are being withheld the truth. Start reading NOW. Read how to live so that you can reduced your risk of preventing cancer in the first place, and already have an idea of what to do if you do get cancer.
I had to help myself with a severe illness the doctors could not help and have been studying natural medicine for 20 years now. It, in fact does have a lot of science to back it up. Again, seek and ye shall find!
The future of medicine is in fact in natural means and we will look back on chemotherapy as one of the worst horrors in natural medicine that it is along with drug treatment for every ill known to man. It is useful for emergency medicine but not much else. Much as you may think it a cliche invented by Kevin Trudeau, (opportunist and thorn in the side of honest alternative medicine practitioners that he is!), he did not invent the saying that “Disease is not a deficiency of this or that drug.” and the saying is absolutely true!
“You may not have much use for the techniques of oncology, but those who have cancer do.”
Most patients with cancer believe what they are told by monopoly medicine and big pharma.
“Oncology has been a huge success story. Many cancers that were once a death sentence are now curable or treatable long term. Survivability of cancer patients is up across the board.”
And yet the incidence of cancer is not going down. It is going up. Monopoly medicine and big pharma refuse to make the public aware of simple changes in lifestyle, diet and nutrition (eg. vitamin D) which would drastically lower the incidence of cancer.
“How would you explain this if you think oncology will go the way of the tonsillectomy? How do you explain the AMAZING efficacy of oncological treatment that keeps getting better and better?”
You must be an oncologist.
So you are conceding that Oncology has been a great success story in terms of treating cancer, but bemoan the fact that in our ageing population cancer rates are going up?
Well all that hippie dippie stuff may well help to reduce the incidence of cancer, but ONCE YOU HAVE CANCER, you had best see the Oncologist as they are highly successful at treating cancer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.