Note on Cancer

This is note rather than an argument. It’s also a note completed late at night.

I saw this documentary, Cancer the Forbidden Cures, some time ago. It was referenced in a comment about an article, in, claiming that chemotherapy boosts cancer growth:

The scientists found that healthy cells damaged by chemotherapy secreted more of a protein called WNT16B which boosts cancer cell survival. The protein was taken up by tumor cells neighboring the damaged cells.
“WNT16B, when secreted, would interact with nearby tumor cells and cause them to grow, invade, and importantly, resist subsequent therapy,” said Nelson.
In cancer treatment, tumors often respond well initially, followed by rapid regrowth and then resistance to further chemotherapy.

The comments on the article are interesting – they argue for and against chemo:

Caitlin Pryce-Davies Trigatti · Grace Lutheran College
This is all very well–but what the hell do you do when your child has an aggressive cancer and you don’t want them to die? I’m currently in this position and while I am open to alternatives I am going thru with chemo to save my daughters life—I’m so scared as it is and am constantly hearing that my choice to give treatment to my child could end up killing her anyway—I’m over it!!

This is the ‘argument from fear’ and it is understandable. We tend to trust the expertise of the medical profession. According to GP Online, a recent poll showed that doctors are the most trusted profession in the UK; It is rational to trust science and people whose expertise is based on science. Claims that there are cures for cancer that have been suppressed by the medical establishment appear to be the stuff of paranoia. The Mayo Clinic website argues that:

If you still believe a cure is being purposefully withheld, ask yourself why a doctor would choose to specialize in cancer research. Oftentimes doctors go into cancer research because they have a family member or friend affected by the disease. They’re just as interested in finding a cure as anyone else, for exactly the same reason — it affects them personally. They hate to see a loved one in pain and don’t wish to lose this person. They also want to spare others what they have gone through.

This is a good point. The documentary cites the success of Gerson Therapy and suggests this is a possible cure but there are several articles online that challenge the effectiveness of this therapy. Gerson Therapy, which emphasises a high intake of fruit, also seems to be contrary to other alternative therapies such as the alkaline diet.

There are clearly difficulties with mainstream medicine in general and with chemotherapy and radiotherapy in the case of cancer treatments but this does not mean that we have to give alternative approaches a ‘free pass’

6 Responses to Note on Cancer

  • billzant says:

    If I didn’t know better reading your notes on cancer would discourage me from following a plant-based diet as a means of dealing with cancer. Thankfully I know better.

    I am not a big fan of the movie Forbidden Cures but what it does highlight is the amount of pressure the establishment especially in the US uses to ensure people continue to use the deadly treatments of radiation and chemo. What I am 100% certain of is this. If tomorrow someone found a cure that worked the US establishment would discredit, and there would be information on the internet to discredit – unless that cure involves huge expensive technology and expensive drug regimes that BigPharma had the patents for. The reason I am not a fan of the “forbidden cures” movie is that it focusses on natural cures but does not talk of lifestyle change. Cancer is a lifestyle disease, and alhough smoking a bit of weed might help some will it help everyone? Cannabis as part of plant-based diet is a completely different question.

    Although personally I consider cancer unlikely as I follow a healthy plant-based diet, if it were to happen I would immediately find a Gerson clinic. There are many movies that talk about Gerson you can find torrents for some on my <a href="” target = “new”>posts and movies page. You site there are detractors. Of course there are, there is a cancer industry that pays people to detract and obfuscate. But are there detractors who have genuinely tried and completed the programme? I don’t know of any, but have read about those who have been cured. Here is a good well-documented example, detract this?

    Of course if you want to be “open-minded” and listen to the paid detractors, you can see what happens in chemo with Farrah Fawcett Majors. Steven Domrey Luch is teaching in Phnom Penh, sadly Farrah Fawcett is no longer with us.

  • billzant says:

    Missed the posts and movies link:-

  • gavin says:

    I agree that cancer is related to lifestyle and your plant based diet is very likely to have preventative value. With regard to cures it is difficult to come to get over the idea that the medical establishment knows best especially as it seems, increasingly, to be selling the idea that cancer is being beaten and that chemo is becoming less traumatic. However I guess we must overcome this intellectual subservience and go with our informed intuition and those medical professionals who have ‘crossed over’ to the alternative side. Dr Mercola writes about Gerson Therapy in this article: He endorses it generally as better than chemo though he says he differs with regard to Gerson’s use of fruit and fruit juices. I would say that there is room for improvement/development in alternative therapies as much as in conventional ones and the research that shows that cancer cells ‘like’ sugar suggests that the Gerson diet should be modified.

    If you have not seen the documentary ‘Cancer is Curable Now’ I am sure you would like it. It makes the case for alternative approaches very clearly:

  • gavin says:

    This page features a compilation of videos and articles:

  • billzant says:

    My understanding of cancer is that it is a growth, things that grow require “soil”, and that soil comes from poor balance in the body. If you have a plant-based diet without any chemical toxins and toxins created by lifestyle then Nature creates that balance in the body thus ensuring there are none of these “soil” conditions. Thus it is preventative. It is also my understanding through macrobiotic people that it is curative, at one stage macrobiotics was presented as a cancer cure. By following a plant-based diet the body regenerates itself removing the soil conditions that allows the cancer to grow. Refined sugar makes a significant contribution to these soil conditions but it is my understanding that natural sugars in their proper balance do not – I don’t know for sure. You stress fruit in Gerson therapy, that is not my understanding of it. I thought it was primarily a juice therapy revolving around a plant-based diet.

    I don’t believe it is intellectually possible to get over the indoctrination in our societies about the medical “Gods”. When people take control of their diet with their own version of plant-basedness, then they experience the changes in their health. From this the indoctrination of the medical establishment can easily be recognised for what it is. It is the Chi insight. People who have done forms of Chi Gung including Tai Chi know chi exists, no amount of detractors have any impact. Tell me anyone who has done Tai Chi who thinks there is no such thing as Chi. Equally tell me anyone who has followed a non-toxic plant-based diet who says it is not good for your health. You can feel both, end of story.

    “Cancer is being beaten” has got to be just radio-chemo hype, I suspect it is on the increase. I think they have gone as far as diagnosing potential cancers and doing removals as a precaution – and then claiming these as a victory over cancer. Maybe this is part of their testing and diagnosis position. Then of course there is the ludicrous pre-emptive case of Angelina Jolie. She has done excellent humanitarian work but if she ever comes to genuinely listen to someone with similar views as myself she is going to realise just how much she has been conned.

    I’m afraid I’m not a big Mercola fan, there is too much money involved with him; his health advice usually leads to a suggestion to buy products he sells online. Having said that most of what he says I agree with. I suspect his point 1) about fructose mostly concerns fructose as an additive such as in the deadly High Fructose Corn Syrup present in coca-cola (pepsi etc.).

    Many macrobiotic people push against fruit, in their terms it is too extreme. Here in Thailand Nature has grown so many wonderful fruits, why? Macrobiotics has a local principle, eat local produce, so I eat lots of fruit. You and I are “displaced” people. By macrobiotic principles eating imported Guyanan food is not good for you, equally if I were to follow an English diet and import “tasty English dishes” ( 🙂 – where?). Being a non-Thai in Thailand might always be for me a health issue?

    I completely agree there is need to improve the practices of all therapies. How can Gerson do that when it is primarily banned from the US?

    I seriously do not like the Gerson movies. They are presented as investigative pieces, someone moving out from Alaska to investigate whether Gerson is effective – Beautiful Truth – when this is just an angle taken by someone retrospectively. This is a misjudgement in my view, I think Gerson stands for itself.

    I don’t believe in raw per se, but I accept raw juices as a cure. This rainy season that at the moment is giving me health difficulties leads me to avoid raw going for hot and spicy to deal with my body temperature.

    I will try to look at the particular cancer movie you mentioned (downloaded it), over my retirement years I have watched, written about and referenced many cancer movies – another one? Maybe.

  • billzant says: