It appears that more than half the people I know who have had chemotherapy for cancer became much worse after the chemo and died shortly after. With the exception of breats cancer chemo and a couple leukemia drugs, most of them kill the patient. Opinions please?

I had always thought that it was the cancer that killed them, not the chemo. My sister died in her early forties from lung cancer that spread throughout her lymph system and she was treated with chemo.

I have another relative now whose had numerous bouts with cancer, from colon to prostate to liver, and now liver again (new cancerous tumor). This time they're supposed to inject beads which are ionically bound to chemo into his liver, mainly in the veins and arteries that surround the tumor.

I think that the cancer is spread when they operate and remove malignant tumors and polyps, it may not be true, but it seems that way to me.

__________________
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanual Kant~

NatMedTalk and Beyond

K2C, what happens is when they operate it kills the immune for a short time and allows the cancer to go wild.

I would say all of them have a very dismal track record. According to conventional medicine if a cancer patient is able to service their treatment for 5 years and 1 day they then say that their treatment was successful. I'm sorry but allowing someone to slowly and painfully die over a five year period is not my idea of success. The Dark Age practice of blood letting to rid the patient of some of their �bad blood� would probably be just as effective.

Consider the very best that modern medicine has to offer.
First they will try to cut the tumor out, assuming that it all in one spot. Of course if they miss or dislodge a few cells in the process those cells can go wandering off and take up residency somewhere else and continue to grow.

But that is OK because we will then follow up with �chemo�. Now the chomo drugs can and do kill cancer cells, which is good, but they also kill off your immune system. Unfortunately this is not the best time to kill off your immune system. What you really want to be doing is everything you can to strengthen it. The result is this puts you in a race to see if the chemo drugs can kill the cancer before the cancer kills you. And you going to run this race without the aid of your immune system working, the odds are not good.

But that is OK because we can help the chemo with the addition of radiation treatments, here again we do know that radiation can and does kill canner cells. Of course we also know that radiation can and does cause healthy cells to become cancerous. So how do you aim this radiation to hit only cancer cells? It is simple, you can�t.

So even though the conventional cure rate is much bleaker they would have you to believe still you must not try alternative treatments, even though they have shown good results without the negative side effects, cause we all know that they are way to cheep and thus cannot be truly effective.

Had an aunt in 97 who was diagnosed with Lung Cancer. The asshole doctor told her we will give you something mild. They gave her a dose on a friday. The next tuesday she passed away.

Had another aunt with uterine cancer. Fairly advanced. They told her 4 weeks of radiation would help. After day 3 she said no way and died a couple weeks later.

In both cases, they had issues, but the treatments made them worse.

Without autopsy it is very difficult to determine what the cause of death is.
I do think that some people die from the chemo. Some die from the cancer and some die from the combination.

My sister in law is in the past 5 year survivial rate for breat cancer. It is now in her bones. She feels well and is very active.. Their goal is not to cure but to sustain as long as possible... which makes a ton of money for them.. She gets a chemo treatment every 3 weeks since last January, of course she has had many previous to this... this is the restart phase after they found it was in bones. She has also had a full mastectomy.

Each IV chemo treatment costs medicare 15,000 and of course she does have supplemental insurance. Now you know where your money goes.... up my sister in laws vein.

__________________
"The nurse should be cheerful, orderly, punctual, patient, full of faith, - receptive to Truth and Love" Mary Baker Eddy
Visit www.HealthSalon.org

15,000$ for an IV bag of drugs that cost pennies. What a scam and highly immoral.

Chemotherapy is a battle between the doctor and the cancer, with the patient as the battlefield.

I believe chemotherapy to be a "failed" treatment, and cancer survivors should be above ground.

__________________
Let Food Be Your Medicine And Medicine Be Your Food.(Hippocrates)

When you use chemo, radiation and surgery for cancer:
It never can cure or stop the cancer, but it will add additional burdens, degradation to your body and immune system. So your chances of dying are more with conventional treatments because you give medically induced afflictions that add to the cancer which at best can only enter remission. It is better to do nothing and best to use holistic lifestyle modification in conjunction with alternative treatments like Gerson, Revici Method, pancreatic enzymes(Nicholas Gonzalez), etc.

This last fall I met a guy at a cruse night at a local restaurant (car show) he had just been diagnosed with cancer. In talking with him I suggested that there are alternative treatments that he should consider. He expressed an interest in anything I might have to offer. Naturally I suggested this site and particularly the cancer forum. Also gave him some information I have on using hydrogen peroxide and or baking soda as a treatment. Plus informed him that his doctor would probably have a fit if said he wanted to try one of them.

Well he did mention the use of hydrogen peroxide to his doctor and predictably the doctor said he had never heard of that, but regardless it couldn�t possibly work. The last I heard he was scheduled to start chemo, the guys in white coats can be very persuasive. Why don�t they have the very best that medical science has to offer? Of course the key phrase here being what medical science has to offer not necessarily the best treatment that is available.

PRE 1910, Doctors were trained differently. There was bioscience (allopathic) and there were others, osteopaths (different from today), homeopaths, herbalists etc. But in 1910 there was the Flexnor report which standardized medical schools to what Big Pharma and money wanted (allopathic)

Before the advent of penicillin there were at least 4 highly effective treatments for infection that had no serious side effects.

Today none of them are used by conventional medicine. One of our goals here is to ressurect them from the supressed.

Elaborate please; what were they?

I know that silver is one of the four.

I also know they used to pack wounds with honey and bee pollen.

Alcohol was also used on wounds.

I think I recall reading that white table sugar was used on wounds too.

__________________
May you always have..Love to Share, Health to Spare, and Friends that Care!