Quotes from Killing Cancer Not People

Author: Robert G. Wright founded the American Anti-Cancer Institute in 2008 after 25 years of private study. He previously had careers in aerospace and business before founding the Institute.

Bill Henderson, in the Foreword, wrote:

In my 12 years of helping cancer patients heal themselves, I become more convinced everyday that there is only one reason people die of cancer. It is lack of information. There is no more important message to learn and teach your loved ones than “… only you can heal yourself.”

Dr. Lynn Jennings, in the second Foreword, wrote:

I hear this again and again. When a patient is diagnosed with cancer, they feel forced into making immediate decisions on treatment. They are intimidated into thinking that a delay to make a decision will be the cause of failure of the prescribed treatment.
Cancer doesn’t occur “overnight.” It is generally accepted that cancer has been present for many years before symptoms or sign develop. A short delay to explore your options is not going to be the cause of a failure.
I object to the way that patients are frightened into believing that the only chance they have is with one of the “golden three” … surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. Worse, is the fact that patients are not told that there are alternatives.
It is my opinion that, of the three golden three, only surgery seems to be helpful (in early stage cancer) … Chemotherapy and radiation treatments increase your risk of developing a new cancer by suppressing or destroying your immune system.

The author, Robert G. Wright wrote:

My motivation lies in the healed bodies of multitudes of cancer sufferers who are walking around and thriving today because they did the right thing – not the usual and customary thing. There is no satisfaction and no consolation in the latter when your family hears “we did the best we could.” And, the truth be known, most of us are aware, deep down, that the result is usually always the same – the patient “didn’t survive.”

Why We Get Cancer

Statistics published on the American Cancer Society Website say that one in two men and one in three women – over 40% of us – will have a “cancer experience.” Very soon that figure will be a full 50%.
The way we live, what we eat and drink, the environment we exist in, the toxins we ingest – either by choice or chance – these, in large part, are the reasons we get cancer. The so-called experts want you to believe that genetics play a major role. They don’t!
It has become increasingly evident that the food we eat is killing us.
Most of us are doing the wrong things by eating wrong foods, living lives largely devoid of real nutrition, adequate hydration and exercise and, instead, filling our swelling bodies with poisons, toxins, proton-pump inhibitors and sugar – then wondering why we have acid reflux and cancer.
It simply means that you are responsible – nobody else – for your own health and whether cancer manifests itself in your body. Sadly, we live in a culture that, in many instances, wants to assign blame and does not want to accept responsibility.
I ask you to always keep at the forefront of your thoughts the concept that what heals cancer also prevents it; and what prevents cancer also heals it.

Brain Washed

We are trained to go to the doctor when we believe something is wrong… As a result, we did exactly what he or she said –no wavering, no question, no debate.
We trust our doctors (and pharmaceuticals) to heal us when they really have no ability to do so. Contrary to popular belief (and hope), drugs don’t heal people and neither do doctors.
Don’t be fooled. Chemotherapy, radiation and surgery cannot heal you – although surgery is sometimes absolutely necessary.

Cancer Treatment

Slash, Poison, Burn. The Big Three. What you probably don’t know is that they have no possibility of healing your cancer. Let me repeat that. They have absolutely no possibility of healing your cancer. They actually cause cancer.
The saddest and most tragic part of all is that we’re not only dying of the “disease” now, we’re dying from the treatments.
Let’s face it; there is no money in a cure for cancer.
And cancer cannot be cured with drugs, surgery, chemo or radiation; not now, not ever, not possible.
When it comes to cancer, your doctor / oncologist will fail you.
We know that conventional therapy doesn’t work – if it did, you would not fear cancer any more than your fear pneumonia.
Modern medicine, with all its wonderful new diagnostic equipment, surgical techniques and drugs, would have you believe that the tumour is the cancer and if you don’t get it out right now you are done. Not true on both counts. The tumour is a symptom and you almost always have time.
You are frightened into believing that surgery and chemical/radiological treatments are your only chance and you must start right now and, second, you are scheduled for surgery, cut open and cut up, told “we got it all” (they never get it all), then set up for chemo and radiation. Your demise has begun.
You are told nothing of alternative therapies and, in many instances, threatened if you even consider them.

Empowerment

It’s your life – not his (doctor’s) – take charge of it.
No one has the right to tell you what to do – especially if you have cancer. That’s a decision you must make for and by yourself.
I know for a fact that most of us do not have all the pertinent and correct information to make it accurately or correctly … most people, due to their lack of understanding concerning the facts surrounding cancer and how it is really healed, make the wrong decision. And although it’s not their fault, for many of these, the statistics prove that it will cost them their lives.

Quotations to Reflect On

Dr. Julian Whitaker said:

You must remember this. If you or a loved one ever faces the scourge of cancer, it is your life that is at stake, not your doctor’s. It’s up to you to take control of your own health… Conventional cancer therapy is toxic and dehumanizing, and it doesn’t work. If it did, we wouldn’t fear cancer. But people rush into these therapies that don’t work because they are too scared to do anything else.

Oncologist James Holland, M.D. wrote:

My definition of cancer quackery is the deliberate misapplication of a diagnostic or treatment procedure in a patient with cancer …The culprit who victimizes his fellow man suffering from cancer … all the while greedily enriching himself, is a quack, a criminal, a jackal among men who deserves the scorn and ostracism of society. Because human life is at stake, he must be controlled.

Brain Cancer: Radiotherapy – Recurrence; Chemo – Recurrence; and Avastin – Dead

It is indeed with a heavy heart that we have to write this story. However, let us pray that similar story like this does not have to be played out all too often in this world of medicine. May you all find wisdom and learn from this sad experience.

In the month of May, I had this exchange of e-mails.

1 May 2013 Dear Dr. K.H. Teo,

Our family and I migrated to Australia 22 years ago in 1990 from Malaysia as a skilled migrants and live in Australia ever since.

This is very sad to let you know that my young Architect daughter has brain cancer (grade IV Glioblastoma multiforme) which diagnosed six months ago and under chemo treatment by cancer Specialist in … Australia.

I searched the internet and found that your holistic approach towards healing and advocate the use of herbs for all cancer patient. I would like to buy your herbs. We have a strong faith in Nichiren Buddhism (Japanese) and praying hard for my daughter recovery. She has a positive attitude (and looking towards to be better healthy life.

Kindly let me know the cost and instructions so that I can remit money to you.

Sincerely thanks. Please reply. Kind regards.

Reply: I am sorry we cannot help patients from foreign countries, especially from Australia. We may have problems with your quarantine. Also we are not a direct selling outfit. Chris.

1 May 2013 Dear Dr. K.H. Teo,

Thanks for your email reply.

I try very hard to contact you through the phone on +604 – 6595881 and it goes to a fax tone. Can you please email me your direct phone contact (not mobile) so that we can have a phone conversation and it does not cost me very much.

I can always take a flight back Penang to buy the herbal medicine from you after you have establish which type of herbs are good for my daughter and bring them myself.

I am very well verse of her brain cancer illness conditions and I can explain to you thoroughly every aspect of her cancer condition and her history. I have a medical file which recorded every chemo treatment and western medicine she has taken including chemo drugs – Termozolmide (Temodal) and now on Avastin (bevacizumab) infusion.

I am waiting for your email now and call you, please.

My family and I are in very desperate situation and we have a lot of pain in our mind and hearts. Hope you understand our feeling as parents and we are praying very hard and trying extremely hard to save our daughter’s life.

Sincerely thanks. Regards.

Reply: You can come and see me with all the medical reports and can take back the herbs. Last week I have a 6 year old girl with brain cancer (like your daughter). No surgery, no chemo because it does not work for such cancer. She took herbs and can now go back to school. Read this story, https://cancercaremalaysia.com/2013/05/23/helping-a-six-year-old-with-cancer-of-the-brain-stem/

Avastin — spreads cancer! That’s the drug they gave you!

There is NO need to talk to me over the phone because there is NOTHING I can do. I need to see the scans and medical reports. Unfortunately the herbs are very bitter and have lousy taste and smell. Not many people can drink them. But that 6-year-old could take them without problem.

I do not talk over the phone for obvious reason that everyone on this earth want to talk to me about their problems. I just cannot cope. Actually I would not want to have patients from overseas. ..NO use …but if you want to come, it is okay with me and then you can get your friends and relatives to send the herbs to you. I cannot handle all these chores.

HER MEDICAL HISTORY

1 May 2013 Dear Dr. Teo,

Let me give you a brief medical history of my daughter. She has brain cancer – Grade IV Glioblastoma multiforme on her Brain Stem diagnosed 6 months ago in October 2012.

Very much earlier in September 2009, she had diffused Glioma on her brain stem and was treated with 30 doses of Radiation-Chemotherapy over a period of 6 weeks and the Diffused Glioma shrunk and life was back to normal.

Things started to change end of October 2012, recurrence of diffused low grade brain stem glioma with high grade transformation in the cerebellum. Also, they are aggressive tumours now. Admitted to hospital and neurosurgeon has done a surgery to implant a Brain Shunt to relief the brain pressure built up and at the same time, biopsy taken.

On 9 November 2012, first Termozolomide (Temodal tablets 300mg each day) Chemotherapy for 5 days and rest for 23 days (1cycle) for 5 cycles and blood test was done before each Chemo treatment. After 2 cycles, on 2 January 2013, MRI Head Scan showed the tumours actually shrunk and the family jumped with joy. Tumours responded to chemo treatment. So continued with Termozolomide Chemo until after the fifth Chemo,

MRI Head Scan on 25 March 2013 was done and sad to say that the tumours had grown back to size even bigger than before. Her condition deteriorated quickly, Medical Oncologist changed to the use of Avastin (becacizumab) infusion. First Avastin infusion was on 4 April 2013. After 3 weeks, second Avastin Infusion on 24 April 2013. And at present, her condition seems not improving.

She is bed bound, unable to sit on wheelchair, blur vision, slurred speech, right hand shaking, upper and lower limbs very weak, overall health very weak and unable to eat by herself – feeding needed by mother. Her condition has deteriorated fast just a matter of 4 weeks.

Dr. Teo, I will definitely come over to consult you and show you all the MRI head scans. I am really working extremely hard to save my daughter. Sincerely thanks, Please reply. Regards.

Reply: There is NO hurry to come and see me. She did not get cancer yesterday — she got cancer many years ago yet. No need to rush. Before you come please know that:

a) There is NO cure for cancer. The type of cancer she has cannot be cure by anybody.

b) The most intelligent thing to do is STOP doing the chemo because it does not work and may even spread the cancer more. See what Avastin does to people in the attached file.

c) After that go to www.BookOnCancer.org and read my book on Cancer What Now — there I have explained everything you need to know. This is written specially for people who come and see me and their expectations.

d) Don’t be misled that there is a cure for cancer. THERE IS NONE. Even if you come to me in a hurry there is NOTHING much I can do except to give you the herbs and hope for the best.

e) I see problems like yours everyday — when doctors gave up, they come to me and expect me to cure them. NO way.

Provided you know what you are coming in here for it is okay with me. Don’t be cheated by people who want to make quick bucks from you.Chris

1 May 2013 Hi Dr. Teo,

Very kind of you for your quick reply.

I have my own reason of coming to see you ASAP and I will explain to you when I see you either on this Friday 3 May 2013 or this Sunday 5 May 2013.

We know there is no cure for this brain cancer and we don’t expect very much as well but just to prolong her life and with your herbs so that she can live a few more year with her strong religious faith, positive attitude and thinking which can create her own strong immune system, control diet and then there is a chance for her to live longer.

At present, she is bed bound and can’t eat by herself, terrible to see my own daughter like this and it is very painful for parents.

Tomorrow morning I will ask my son to book a flight to KL and connecting flight to Penang by Air Asia and hopefully to see Friday or Sunday afternoon as stated in the website or please advise. I think the flight will be on this Friday early morning at 5 am. Perth time is the same as Penang time. My son is studying hard for his university exams now.

There will be no more Avastin infusion till 15 May 2013 and we still have time to stop it. Before that Avastin infusion, she needs to have an MRI Head Scan first and see any improvement on the size of tumours. And if no improvement, then treatment with Avastin infusion will also stop.

Looking forward to see you soon, Dr. Chris Teo.I have been reading your website on newsletters and other material and you are a remarkable Doctor. Please reply. Regards.

Radiotherapy: Recurrence After three years

Temodal shrunk tumour but it grew bigger after that

She had Avastin And She died

At CA Care I am not god

7 May 2013 Dear Dr. Chris Teo,

Very sad to inform you that when I arrived in Australia early Sunday morning (5/5/13), my daughter has passed away. Terrible news for the family. Sincerely thanks. Regards.

Avastin Spreads Cancer and Makes It More Aggressive

BOOK REVIEW: HOW WE DO HARM Part 1

by Yeong Sek Yee & Khadijah Shaari

THE AUTHOR is Dr. Otis Webb Brawley, MD, the chief medical and executive Vice president of the American Cancer Society, and currently serving as Professor of Hematology, Oncology, Medicine, and Epidemiology at Emory University and a fellow in Medical Oncology at the National Cancer Institute, USA.

WHAT THE BOOK IS ABOUT: Yes, the book carries a very unique title. You must really read the whole book to find out how oncologists/doctors do harm…..contrary to the first precepts of medical ethics taught in medical school….”FIRST, DO NO HARM”

Dr Brawley exposes the dark side of healthcare today in America—the overtreatment of the rich, the under treatment of the poor, the financial conflicts of interest that determine the care that physicians provide, and that pharmaceutical companies are only concerned with selling drugs, regardless of whether they improve health or do harm. In the book, Dr Brawley tells of doctors who select treatment based on the payment they will receive, rather than on demonstrated scientific results; hospitals and pharmaceutical companies that seek out patients to treat even if they are not actually ill (but as long as their insurance company will pay).

Through case examples, mostly involving cancer, Dr Brawley documents the sometimes excessive and unnecessary treatments patients receive because doctors prescribe medications and push protocols that have no clinical basis while having clear financial gain for the many doctors and pharmaceutical companies involved. From the woman who received a hemoglobin-building drug during breast cancer treatment that likely stimulated more tumor growth and shortened her life, to the elderly gentleman who underwent a free prostate screening that led to numerous treatments ultimately leading to his death (when some forms of prostate cancer don’t need to be treated at all), Dr. Brawley is trying to make patients and doctors alike question the policies and self-interest that drive our health care system.

Listen to these videos.

Medical Book Review: How We Do Harm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKsSBchsCpo

Comments by Dr Kathy Miller, MD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ndImCj1A2M

Otis Brawley at TEDMED 2012

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctsqa7J4Ank

How American Medicine Does Harm To Patients

a) In the back room of American medicine, the analysis of the patient’s durability has a special name: A Wallet Biopsy. If the biopsy returns positive, you get to stay in the hospital, you get more treatment, and you can make a follow-up appointment. If it returns negative, you have little hope of getting consistent care (page 23).

b) Although the “wallet biopsy” syndrome favours the rich or insured, wealth in America is no protection from getting lousy care. Ironically wealth can increase your risk of getting lousy care. When wealthy patients demand irrational care, it’s not hard to find a doctor willing to provide it. If you have more money, doctors tell you more of what they sell, and they just might kill you (page 23).

c) Our (American) medical system fails to provide care when care is needed and fails to stop expensive, often unnecessary and frequently harmful ‘interventions’ even in situations when science has proven these interventions are wrongheaded (page 22).

d) The financial incentives that drive the medical community have a devastating impact on patients and health care costs….doctors who own labs or medical facility, have been shown to order more tests than doctors who don’t. A doctor at a for-profit practice is more likely to prescribe the treatments that benefit him (the doctor) the most (page 25).

e) Would a doctor who sells radiation therapy tell you to go across the street to get chemotherapy even in cases where studies show that it’s more appropriate? Would either of these medical entrepreneurs advise you to wait for six months to see whether your disease is of the sort that would actually harm you? All too often, the answers to these questions are NO!!! (page 25).

The following are some of Dr Brawley’s strong views on some aspects of modern medicine as we browse through the book again:

Professional societies of doctors who perform expensive medical procedures issue “evidence-based guidelines” that is anything but evidence based guidelines. Instead, the purpose of many of these documents (“guidelines”) is to protect the specialties’ financial stake in the system (page 26).
Patients need to understand that more care is not better care, that doctors are not necessarily right, and that some doctors are not even truthful (page 27).
In most cancers, the quality of the surgery is the most important factor in the ultimate outcome. You only get one chance to do the surgery right, so choose your surgeon well and pray you have an exceptional surgeon having an exceptionally good day (page 32).
Comparing the prognosis with and without chemotherapy is key to the decision to forgo treatment (page 56)… (and consider the costs as well).
Adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer was relatively easy, like following a recipe from a cook book. Providing adjuvant therapy for breast cancer is a great place to be mediocre: no clinical judgements need to be made, and the money is good (page 63).
Doctors who don’t know the limits of their knowledge are another matter. Doctors who don’t know what they don’t know–and don’t care–are dangerous (page 64).
God expects us to work for social justice, and the best way to serve Him is through caring for others. Some people praise GOD by going to church on Sunday. I, (Dr Brawley) seek to do the same daily by helping those in distress, and by telling the truth (page 76).
….Overtreatment equals harm (page 78).
Physicians in private practice are expected to generate certain revenues, and their take-home pay is usually determined by the amount of medical services and drugs they provide (page 85).
With powerful incentives set in motion, many hospitals and oncology practices in the US instructed nurses to ask leading questions about “fatigue” with the intent of expanding sales to a growing number of patients and upping the dosage to each patient. This is referred to as “an ESA treatment opportunity” (ESA means erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, drugs used to overcome fatigue, low blood counts). (page 85).
To increase their earnings, drug companies and doctors set out on a search for treatment opportunities, often forgetting about the sacred trust between doctors and patients (page 85).
The exact magnitude of harm is harder to gauge…most of the money was spent on drugs (e.g. ESAs) that were prescribed for the wrong reasons and under false, manufactured pretences. These drugs were not used to cure disease or make patients feel better. They were used to make money for doctors and pharmaceutical companies at the expense of patients, insurance companies…the technical term for this is overtreatment and overtreatment equals harm (page 97).
Doctors do some horrible, irrational things under the guise of seeking to benefit patients….For example offering a bone marrow transplant for a breast cancer patient, prophylactic doses of ESA drugs…these are only a few examples. The system rewards us for selling our goods and services, and we play the game (page 122).
You don’t deviate from the science. You don’t make it up as you are going along. You have to have a reason to give the drugs you are giving. You have to tell the patients the truth (page 145).
Commenting further on ESA drugs, some doctors didn’t bother to check what the patient’s haemoglobin was and erred on the side of giving the ESA every time they give chemotherapy. Doctors routinely prescribed the drugs for uses, in which it had not been studied-such as anaemia caused by cancer itself, as opposed to anaemia caused by chemotherapy (page 78).
….Doctors try out things just to see whether they will work (page 160) Earlier in the book (page 29), Dr Brawley mentioned that “A hospital was the place where they withheld treatment or where they tried things on you without telling you what they were doing and why (page 29/30).
When a drug succeeds in controlling cancer, we learn about it at conferences and in scientific journals. Stories of our fiascos, though no less instructive, are almost invisible, especially if there are cautionary tales that lay bare the fundamental flaws in the system (page 157).
Cancer is hard to understand, and yet doctors rush patients (page 182).
Survival measures time that elapses after diagnosis. By diagnosing a cancer earlier, survival rates are increased. The more you diagnose, the more you push up survival (page 193).
Somewhere along the way, we have been conditioned to believe that a new treatment is always better (page 197) A new drug must be better than the old. A new medical device must also be better (page 202).
Inappropriate use of certain drugs can be attributed to the profit motive. A recent study of prescribing pattern demonstrated that as soon as the profit motive weakened, inappropriate prescribing of these drugs dropped (page 197).
The overuse of radiologic imaging is a major problem…..”up to one-third of radiologic imaging tests are unnecessary. This is a serious problem, not just because these tests are expensive, but because they expose the patient to radiation that can cause cancer. Some have estimated that 1% of cancers in the United States are caused by radiation from medical imaging” (page 202).
Even when administered properly, cancer drugs can bring the patient to the brink of death. An overdose can easily push him off the cliff (page 279).
Much of the money currently spent on healthcare (in the US) is money wasted on unnecessary and harmful, sick care. Even for the sick, a lot of necessary care is not given at the appropriate time. The result is more expensive care given later (page 281).
The medical profession frequently allows bad doctors to continue to practice. The profession doesn’t police itself. Chalk it all up to apathy. Or ignorance (page 282).
Many physicians are ignorant of some aspects of the field of medicine in which they practice. They tend to think the newer pill or newer treatment must be better because it is new. Ignorance is a failure to think deeply. It is a failure to be inquisitive. It is a failure to keep an open mind (page 282).

Dr Brawley’s most direct and blunt statement in the book is….”America does not have a health-care system. We have a sick-care system”. Is Malaysia there yet?? We welcome your views.

FURTHER REFERENCES:

FOR BOOKS OF A SIMILAR NATURE, WE RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING:

1) MORE HARM THAN GOOD by Dr Alan Zelicoff, MD (Read what your doctor may not tell you about common treatments and procedures). ISBN NO: 978-0-8144-0027-2 (2008).

2) OVERDIAGNOSED by Dr H. Gilbert Welch, MD and Dr Lisa M. Schwartz, MD and Dr Steven Woloshin, MD. (An expose of…making people sick in the pursuit of health). ISBN NO: 978-08070-2199-6 (2011).

3) MONEY DRIVEN MEDICINE by Dr David K. Cundiff, MD (Read about tests and treatments that don’t work). ISBN NO: 0-9761571-0-1 (2006).

4) DOCTORS ARE MORE HARMFUL THAN GERMS by Dr Harvey Bigelsen, MD (Find out how surgery can be hazardous to your health and what to do about it). ISBN NO: 978-1-55643-958-2 (2011).

5) WHAT YOUR DOCTOR WON’T (OR CAN’T) TELL YOU by Dr Evan S. Levine, MD (Read about the failures of American Medicine and how to avoid becoming a statistic). ISBN NO: 978-04252000-87 (2004).

6) DEATH BY PRESCRIPTION by Dr Ray D Strand, MD (Find out the shocking truth behind an overmedicated nation) ISBN NO: 0-7852-6484-1 (2003).

7) OVERDOSE by Dr Jay S. Cohen, MD (Discover how prescription drugs and its side effects affect your health) ISBN NO: 978-1585-4237-05 (2004).

8) HOPE OR HYPE by Dr Richard A. Deyo, MD, MPH and Dr Donald L. Patrick, PH.D (Read how the obsession with medical advances and the high costs of false promises and a lot more). ISBN No: 978-0814408-452 (2005).

9) A WORLD WITHOUT CANCER by Dr Margaret Cuomo, MD (A radiologist herself, she describes very candidly that conventional cancer treatments are fatally flawed….find out why Chapter 4 is entitled CUT, POISON AND BURN).

ISBN NO: 978-1-60961(2012).

10) NATURAL STRATEGIES FOR CANCER PATIENTS by Dr Russell Blaylock, MD and a neurosurgeon. (Find out why Chapter 3 is called CHEMOTHERAPY: POISONING CANCER AND YOU and Chapter 4 is RADIATION THERAPY: BURNING CANCER). ISBN NO: 0-7582-0221-0 (2003).

11) HOW MODERN MEDICINE KILLED MY BROTHER by Dr Russell Blaylock, MD and a neurosurgeon. (Read Dr Blaylock’s expose at the following link: http://www.wnho.net/medicine_killed_brother.htm

12) BAD PHARMA by Dr Ben Goldacre, MD (An expose how the drug companies mislead doctors and harm patients). ISBN NO: 978-0-00-735074-2 (2012)

13) HOW AMERICAN HEALTHCARE KILLED MY FATHER by David Goldhill (In 2007, David Goldhill’s father died from infections acquired in a hospital, one of more than two hundred thousand avoidable deaths per year caused by medical error…and the bill was enormous). Read David’s summary at the following link: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/307617/ or you may wish to read his just released book called CATASTROPHIC CARE: HOW AMERICAN HEALTH CARE KILLED MY FATHER (ISBN NO: 978-0307961549….Jan 2013).

14) HOW MODERN MEDICINE IS KILLING YOU……just Google the title and you will find lots of articles to read and videos to view.

15) WHEN DOCTORS DON’T LISTEN: HOW TO AVOID MISDIAGNOSES AND UNNECESSARY TESTS by Dr Leana Wen MD and Dr Joshua Kosowsky (The authors argue that diagnosis, once the cornerstone of medicine, is fast becoming a lost art, with grave consequences). ISBN NO: 978-0312-5949-916.

NB: THERE IS A LOT MORE BOOKS OF SUCH NATURE TO FILL UP THE NEXT FEW PAGES.

NB: THESE NOTES, COMPILED BY YEONG SEK YEE AND KHADIJAH SHAARI, ARE MEANT STRICTLY FOR YOUR INFORMATION AND NOT INTENDED TO DISSUADE YOU FROM SEEKING CONVENTIONAL CANCER TREATMENTS. THIS HAS TO BE SOLELY YOUR RESPONSIBILITY/DISCRETION.

Helping a Six-Year-Old with Cancer of the Brain Stem

Ros (S-321) is 6-years old. For about a year, when she was 5 years old, she had been vomiting and having headaches. In December 2012, her parent brought her to the hospital where a CT scan was performed. The doctor in Aceh, Indonesia said there was a tumour in her brain. It was not operable. Ros was asked to go to Jakarta for further treatment.

Her parent decided to bring her to Kuala Lumpur instead. MRI performed on 14 December 2012 indicated a well-defined mass measuring 3.2 x 3.5 x 2.9 cm, compressing onto the adjacent 4^th ventricle. The lateral and 3^rd ventricles were dilated. This was diagnosed as pontine tumour.

The doctor said the tumour was not operable and there was also no medication for her. Back in Aceh, Ros’s parent started her on herbs like Soursop leave tea, Sarang Semut, etc.

On 20 January 2013, her father came to Penang to seek our help. Surprisingly, Ros did not have much symptoms. She would only suffer headaches if she had fevers. She had squint or cock eyes, otherwise she was alright.

Ros was prescribed Capsule A, Brain Tea 1 and 2 plus C-tea and Brain Leaf. Due to her age, she was asked to take only at half dosage. We warned her father that the herbs are bitter and his daughter might have difficulty taking them. His reaction was, We will try.

Our Herbs Helped Her

To our surprise Ros’s auntie came back to see us on 22 February 2013 – a month after taking the herbs. Ros did not have difficulty drinking the bitter and awful tasting herbal teas! And she had improved. There were no more fevers. Her eye movements had improved. There no more headaches or vomiting. Indeed the herbs had helped Ros tremendously.

There was one problem though! The family wanted Ros to bring fried bananas to school. Our answer was, Absolutely no! No fried stuff. Since taking our herbs, Ros seemed to have frequent urination at night. Sometimes she even urinated in bed without knowing. Since Ros did not come to see us, there was nothing we could do to assess her bladder energy using the AcuGraph. We suggested that we would let the problem take care of itself.

Two months later, i.e. 26 April 2013 (and Ros was already 3 months on our herbs), Ros’s father came to see us again. He was happy and said that Ros had improved tremendously. Her eyes seemed to be normal now. If she reads too much then her eyes become juling (cockeye or squint). Otherwise she is okay. Since taking the herbs Ros did not have any more headaches. She did not vomit either.

The family had solved the problem of her night urination! If Ros were to take the herbal teas way pass 6 p.m. she would urinate frequently at night. If she was to take all teas before 6 p.m. there would be no urination problem!

Current Medical Knowledge About Pontine Cancer and Its Treatment

The brain stem consists of the midbrain, pons and medulla as shown in the diagram below.

About Pontine Glioma

Pontine gliomas are cancerous tumours that originate from the part of the brain known as the pons or the brain stem. It is often referred to as diffuse pontine glioma.
This cancer accounts for 10 to 15 percent of all childhood brain tumours. They rarely occur in adults.
It affected children aged 5 to 10 years old but it can occur at any age in childhood.

What is the cause of this cancer?

Currently there is no answer!

Prognosis

It is a highly aggressive and difficult to treat brain tumor.
- Prognosis is poor.
- Survival past 12 to 14 months is uncommon.

Symptoms

Each child may experience symptoms differently.

Pontine tumors affect the cranial nerves, causing symptoms related to the nerves that supply the muscles of the eye and face, and muscles involved in swallowing. This may give rise to symptoms such as:

double vision,
squints ( a condition where the eyes point in different directions. One eye may turn inwards, outwards, upwards or downwards while the other eye looks forward.
inability to close the eyelids completely,
dropping one side of the face,
facial weakness,
problems chewing and swallowing.

The tumor also affects the “long tracks” of the brain, with resultant

weakness of the arms or legs and difficulty with speech and walking.
weakness in the arms and legs
problems with walking and coordination
difficulty with tasks like handwriting
changes in personality and behaviour.

Tumors may also block the flow of cerebrospinal fluid in the brain, causing increased pressure with headaches and vomiting resulting in:

headaches,
nausea and vomiting.

Symptoms usually worsen rapidly because the tumor is rapidly growing.

Treatments options

Radiation therapy. Radiation therapy has been the main treatment approach. The patients’ symptoms often improve dramatically during or after six weeks of irradiation. Unfortunately, problems usually recur after six to nine months, and progress rapidly.
Experimental chemotherapy.
Surgery is not generally possible because these tumors are widely spread within the brain stem and cannot be removed. Surgery may be possible in the few patients where the tumor is very localized. Surgical resection is not an option because of where the tumor is located. Surgery in this part of the brain can cause severe neurological damage.

According to from the Dana-Faber Cancer Institute, Boston, USA, website many specialized brain tumor treatment centers have now specialists who deliver complementary or alternative medicines. These treatments, which may help control pain and side effects of therapy include the following.

acupuncture/acupressure
therapeutic touch
massage
herbs
dietary recommendations.

The above information is obtained from the following websites:

Diagram from: http://www.interactive-biology.com/107/what-parts-of-the-brain-control-respiration/
The Dana-Faber Cancer Institute, Boston, USA. http://www.dana-farber.org/Health-Library/Childhood-Diffuse-Pontine-Glioma.aspx
The Royal Marsden, London, UK. http://www.royalmarsden.nhs.uk/cancer-information/children/pages/pontine-glioma.aspx
St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA. http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=b86c061585f70110VgnVCM1000001e0215acRCRD

Articles from the Internet: How Safe Or Unsafe Are Medical Imaging Procedures?

Yeong Sek Yee & Khadijah Shaari

To understand more about the radiation risks from medical imaging, we recommend that you read the following articles posted in the Internet. Just Google topics like the dangers of medical/diagnostic tests, etc, etc. There are plenty of materials to read. Here are some examples.

1. Medical Radiation Soars, With Risks Often Overlooked

Radiation, like alcohol, is a double-edged sword. Radiation can reveal hidden problems, from broken bones and lung lesions to heart defects and tumors. But it also has a potentially serious medical downside: the ability to damage DNA and, 10 to 20 years later, to cause cancer. CT scans alone, which deliver 100 to 500 times the radiation associated with an ordinary X-ray and now provide three-fourths of Americans’ radiation exposure, are believed to account for 1.5 percent of all cancers that occur in the United States.

Although the cancer-causing effects of radiation are cumulative, no one keeps track of how much radiation patients have already been exposed to when a new imaging exam is ordered. Even when patients are asked about earlier exams, the goal is nearly always to compare new findings with old ones, not to estimate the risks of additional radiation.

2. Radiation Risks from Medical Imaging

The FDA has put forward its plan to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure from CT scans, nuclear medicine studies, and fluoroscopy.

An individual’s chance of getting cancer from a single scan is small. But because the scans are so widely used, they cause a considerable amount of harm. One study estimated that the CT scans performed in 2007 are related to some 29,000 future cancers.

What are these tests? What are their risks? When do the tests’ benefits outweigh their risks? Here are WebMD’s answers to these and other questions.

How much radiation does a person get from medical imaging studies?

Getting a CT scan gives a patient as much radiation as 100 to 800 chest X-rays.
Getting a nuclear medicine study exposes a patient to as much radiation as 10 to 2,050 chest X-rays.
Getting a fluoroscopic procedure exposes a patient to as much radiation as 250 to 3,500 chest X-rays.

Moreover, doctors may prescribe scans that aren’t medically justified. And since risk from radiation exposure accumulates over a lifetime, certain scans may not be appropriate for people who’ve already had a lot of scans.

3. Dangers of Medical Imaging Tests and Procedures

Exposure to medical imaging radiation is a concern in both adults and children. However, radiation exposure in children is of a greater concern because they are more sensitive to radiation than adults. In addition, children have longer life expectancy than adults. With repeated exposure or accumulated exposure to radiation, children may be more likely to develop health problems in the future.

Life time risk of developing cancer increases when a patient undergoes more frequent X-ray exams and at larger doses, according to the FDA. Women who are exposed to the radiation may have higher lifetime risk for developing radiation-associated cancer than men after receiving the same exposures at the same ages.

While experts believe that the risk of developing cancer with radiation exposure is relatively small, radiation exposure through these medical imaging tests should never be taken lightly.

4. A Closer Look: The Downside of Diagnostic Imaging

CT and nuclear medicine tests do have a downside, however: they deliver doses of ionizing radiation from 50 to over 500 times that of a standard x-ray, such as a chest x-ray or mammogram. Scientists have raised concerns that such large doses of radiation plus the widespread and increasing use these diagnostic procedures may, in a small but significant way, pose a cancer risk in the general population.

“The use of CT in particular has gone up dramatically, and we’ve drastically lowered the threshold for using it,” said Dr. Rebecca Smith-Bindman, a visiting research scientist with NCI’s Radiation Epidemiology Branch (REB). “There’s a general belief that if you get a CT scan, you must be reasonably sick and must really need it. This is no longer true, and we are increasingly using CT scans in patients who are not that sick. There’s been drift not only in how often we use it but in how we use it.”

“We’ve only talked about the benefits of CT for the past 20 years, without considering any potential harm” she continued.

Research estimated that approximately 29,000 future cancers could be related to CT scans performed in the United States in that year alone, with women being at higher risk than men. About 35 percent of these cancers were projected to be related to scans performed in patients 35 to 54 years old, and 15 percent related to scans performed in children younger than 18.

The medical community has proposed many ways to reduce radiation exposure from diagnostic medicine without negatively impacting the quality of patient care:

Reduce the number of CT exams by using other technologies (such as ultrasound or MRI) in cases where they would provide equal diagnostic quality.
Limit the use of CT in healthy patients who would obtain little benefit (such as whole-body CT screening).
Limit the use of repeat CT surveillance of patients in whom a diagnosis has already been made, when repeat scanning would lead to little change in their treatment.
Track and collect information on radiation exposure for individual patients

5. Ionizing Radiation Exposure with Medical Imaging

Medical diagnostic procedures used to define and diagnose medical conditions are currently the greatest manmade source of ionizing radiation exposure to the general population. The risks and benefits of radiation exposure due to medical imaging and other sources must be clearly defined for clinicians and their patients.

Radiation damages the cell by damaging DNA molecules directly through ionizing effects on DNA molecules or indirectly through free radical formation. A lower dose delivered through a long period of time theoretically allows the body the opportunity to repair itself. Radiation damage may not cause any outward signs of injury in the short term; effects may appear much later in life.

Medical ionizing radiation has great benefits and should not be feared, especially in urgent situations. Obviously, using the lowest possible dose is desired. In fact, a central principle in radiation protection is “as low as reasonably achievable.” Therefore, the prescribing physician must justify the examination and determine relevant clinical information before referring the patient to a radiologist. Indications and decisions should reflect the possibility of using non-ionizing radiation examinations, such as MRI or ultrasonography.

Repetition of examinations should be avoided at other clinics or sites.

The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) estimates that the average person has an approximately 4-5% increased relative risk of fatal cancer after a whole-body dose of 1 Sv.

X-rays (including CT scans) should be ordered judiciously. An article in the New England Journal of Medicine notes that the evidence is “convincing” that the radiation dose from CT scans can lead to cancer induction in adults and “very convincing” in the case of children.Clinicians need to realize that doses from a typical CT scan can range from 6-35 times higher than the dose of a standard chest x-ray examination.

6. Doctors Order More Tests when They Benefit Financially: Ask If You Really Need that Test Your Doctor Ordered

Researchers from the Institute for Technology Assessment at the Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Radiology found that there was no mistaking that diagnostic imaging tests were being ordered far more than they deemed necessary. The question that begs to be answered is, “why?”

Many doctors referred their patients to imaging centers that were affiliated with their practice, or were even done by the doctor’s own staff. When a physician has such a close relationship with the provider conducting the imaging study, there is the possibility that the physician will benefit financially from ordering additional imaging studies.

7. Radiation Danger from CT and PET Scans

A recent study in the New England Journal of Medicine has found a significant link between radiation exposure and imaging procedures such as CT and PET scans. The use of such technologies has grown from just 3 million in 1980 to 67 million in 2006, and has contributed, some estimate, to upwards of 2% of fatal cancer cases.

Studies have shown that there is little consumer understanding of the risks involved in being subject to such procedures.

Dr. Harlan M. Krumholz proffers that the use of CT scans is increasing because they have become part of our culture. “People use imaging instead of examining a patient; they use imaging instead of talking to the patient,” (New York Times, Study Finds Radiation Risk for Patients, August 27, 2009). For these reasons, imaging technologies have become a common diagnostic tool even when they are not required.

8. Study Finds Radiation Risk for Patients

At least four million Americans under age 65 are exposed to high doses of radiation each year from medical imaging tests, according toa new study in The New England Journal of Medicine. About 400,000 of those patients receive very high doses, more than the maximum annual exposure allowed for nuclear power plant employees or anyone else who works with radioactive material.

Dr. Rita Redberg, a cardiologist and researcher at the University of California, San Francisco, who has extensively studied the use of medical imaging, said it would probably result in tens of thousands of additional cancers. It’s certain that there are increased rates of cancer at low levels of radiation, and as you increase the levels of radiation, you increase cancer.

Dr. Reza Fazel, a cardiologist at Emory University, said the use of scans appeared to have increased even from 2005 to 2007, the period covered by the paper. “These procedures have a cost, not just in terms of dollars, but in terms of radiation risk.”

9. Radiation Exposure from Medical Diagnostic Imaging Procedures

Ionizing radiation is used daily in hospitals and clinics to perform diagnostic imaging procedures.

Which types of diagnostic imaging procedures use radiation?

• In x-ray procedures, x rays pass through the body to form pictures on film or on a computer or television monitor, which are viewed by a radiologist. If you have an x-ray test, it will be performed with a standard x-ray machine or with a more sophisticated x-ray machine called a CT or CAT scan machine.

• In nuclear medicine procedures, a very small amount of radioactive material is inhaled, injected, or swallowed by the patient. If you have a nuclear medicine exam, a special camera will be used to detect energy given off by the radioactive material in your body and form a picture of your organs and their function on a computer monitor. A nuclear medicine physician views these pictures. The radioactive material typically disappears from your body within a few hours or days.

Do magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound use radiation?

MRI and ultrasound procedures do not use ionizing radiation. If you have either of these types of studies, you are not exposed to radiation.

There is no conclusive evidence of radiation causing harm at the levels patients receive from diagnostic xray exams. Although high doses of radiation are linked to an increased risk of cancer, the effects of the low doses of radiation used in diagnostic imaging are not known.

10. Radiation Risk of Medical Imaging for Adults and Children

Which kinds of tests are associated with Ionising radiation and which ones are not?

1. X-rays
X-rays are ionising radiation produced by equipment used in the following types of procedures:

Computed tomography (CT)
Fluoroscopy (where the image produced by the X-ray beam is made into a moving picture on a TV screen
Plain radiology/X-ray film, digital and computed radiography (see Plain Radiography / X-rays)
Mammography (see Diagnostic Mammography)
- The radiation exposure from having an X-ray, fluoroscopy, mammography or CT examination only occurs while the machine is on.

2. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
MRI uses strong magnetic fields and radio waves to produce images. It does not use ionising radiation (see Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)).

3. Ultrasound
Ultrasound uses high frequency sound waves that the human ear cannot detect to obtain imaging information (see Ultrasound).

4. Nuclear medicine
Nuclear medicine is a medical specialty that involves the administration of a small amount of a radioactive material into the patient. The patient becomes weakly radioactive for a short time and images are made from the radiation given off from the patient (see Nuclear Medicine).

How do I decide whether the risks are outweighed by the benefits of exposure to X-radiation when I have a radiology test or procedure?

Ask your doctor about the procedure and how it will help to provide information about your symptom or the presence of disease or injury.
Ask your doctor about the risks of the procedure and what the risks would be of not having the procedure, i.e. if your doctor needs the information in order to identify and plan the most appropriate treatment.

While there is a small risk of harm from ionising radiation, there could be a greater risk of not having the information, e.g. failure to detect potentially serious disease that may be easily treated at an early stage but harder to treat or incurable if detected later.

It may also be as beneficial to you to confirm the absence of disease or injury as it is to confirm its diagnosis.

11. Radiation in Medical Imaging Has Its Risks

Almost all medical procedures, including imaging procedures that use radiation, have risks associated with them. Physicians and patients should carefully consider the potential benefits and the risks when considering the use of imaging techniques that involve radiation.

Here are some things for healthcare providers to consider when deciding whether or not an imaging procedure that uses medical radiation is the right choice.

What is the purpose of the procedure? For example, is it to arrive at a diagnosis, assess treatment response, or is it preventive screening?
Are there alternative imaging procedures that could accomplish the same goal without medical radiation, such as ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging?
What are the risks of not having the imaging procedure done?
How old is the patient? The risks for pediatric and adolescent patients may be different than for adults.
Is the patient pregnant, possibly pregnant, or breastfeeding?
What other procedures is the patient likely to undergo during this workup?
What is this person’s radiation exposure from previous medical procedures? For example, has the person undergone multiple CT or nuclear medicine scans in the past?
What is this person’s occupational exposure to radiation, if any?
Will the imaging exam be performed on low-dose equipment?

The standard unit of measure for radiation absorbed by an individual is called the “Sievert,” or Sv (sometimes identified by a smaller unit called the “millisievert,” or mSv). Common medical imaging tests such as X-rays or mammograms generally expose patients to a radiation dose of less than 1 mSv.

Other procedures using CT, nuclear stress tests, or fluoroscopy-guided exams often involve radiation in the range of 5-40 mSv.

A single exposure at these diagnostic levels may not pose much risk to the patient. But when a patient has numerous tests over a period of time, the cumulative exposure may raise the level of risk. To minimize cumulative exposure, physicians should determine whether a procedure using medical radiation is necessary to achieve the diagnosis or whether an alternative imaging procedure may offer the same diagnostic benefit.

12. How Safe or Unsafe Are Medical Imaging Procedures?

Radiation exposure is a known risk factor for cancer. Recent estimates suggest, for example, that as many as two percent of cancers could be attributed to radiation during CT scans. Although the radiation exposure from a single test is minimal, the frequency of the use of imaging tests that emit radiation continues to grow expansively, and often patients undergo repeated or multiple types of tests, thereby increasing their cumulative exposure to potentially cancer-causing radiation.

Advice to Patients

Lately, we have noticed that certain medical centres have been urging cancer patients to perform regular CT or PET scans (some every 3 months) to “monitor” the progress of their cancer treatment. Sometimes some cancer patients think that such CT/PET scans are “treatment” itself. The medical establishment obviously have a financial benefit in urging you to perform more imaging/diagnostic procedures.

When deciding whether or not to perform further imaging/diagnostic procedures, we would advise you to seek answers to the following:

What is the purpose of the procedure? For example, is it to arrive at a diagnosis, assess treatment response, or is it preventive screening?
Are there alternative imaging procedures that could accomplish the same goal without medical radiation, such as ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging?
What are the risks of not having the imaging procedure done?
What is your radiation exposure from previous medical procedures? For example, have you undergone multiple CT or nuclear medicine scans in the past?

Each time you are asked to do a CT Scan/PET Scan, be aware of the amount of radiation that would be bombarding your body and do remember that the radiation is accumulative i.e. it accumulates in your body, not the doctor’s body (except his wallet gets heavier). The following article is self explanatory:

Video Presentation: Talk by Chris Teo, 11 May 2013 Kuala Lumpur

Pt 1 Get The Best Of Both Worlds

Pt 2 Die of Cancer or Of Treatment

Pt 3 Overblown Statistics and Empty Promise

Pt 4 Doc, Give Me An Honest Answer

Pt 5 Beware Expensive and Dangerous Drug That Does Not Cure

Pt 6 Does Chemo Make Sense? Are Doctors Truly Honest?

Pt 7 Chemo Treats or Promotes Cancer?

Pt 8 Don’t Panic, Heal Yourself

Pt 9 Believe the Diagnosis Not the Prognosis

Pt 10 Chemo Almost Kill, Herbs Kept Him Alive

Pt 11 To Live or Die Is Your Choice

Pt 12 Recovered: Even After Doctor Said No Chance

Pt 13 Doctor’s Bullying Ways and Self-interest

Pt 14 The CA Care Therapy

Chemotherapy Spreads Cancer and Makes It More Aggressive: Articles From the Internet

Compiled by Yeong Sek Yee & Khadijah Shaari

1. Perilous Approach: Avastin and Sutent Promote Growth of Breast Cancer Stem Cells

(Note: Many patients in Malaysia have been treated with this very expensive drug)

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently revoked approval of Avastin for treating breast cancer. The reversal was in response to clinical trials showing that the drug’s benefit was short-lived, with breast cancer patients quickly relapsing and the cancer becoming more invasive and metastatic.

Cancer treatments designed to block the growth of blood vessels were found to increase the number of cancer stem cells in breast tumors in mice, suggesting a possible explanation for why these drugs don’t lead to longer survival, according to a study by researchers at the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center.

While anti-angiogenic drugs do shrink tumors and slow the time until the cancer progresses, the effect does not last, and the cancer eventually regrows and spreads.

The researchers treated mice with breast cancer using the anti-angiogenesis drugs Avastin (bevacizumab) and Sutent (sunitinib). The researchers found that tumors treated with these drugs developed more cancer stem cells, which fuel a cancer’s growth and spread and are often resistant to standard treatment.

2) Chemotherapy Can Make Cancers More Resistant To Treatment And Even Encourage Them To Grow

Chemotherapy treatment for some cancers may actually encourage tumours to grow, researchers have claimed.
The treatment triggers the healthy body cells around the tumour to produce a protein that helps the disease to resist treatment.
The surprise discovery suggests that some forms of the cancer treatment are doing more harm than good.

3) Chemo Does Not Cure: Often It Inflicts Damage and Spreads Cancer

German investigators from Friedrich-Schiller University in Jena, have shown that Taxol (the “gold standard of chemo”) causes a massive release of cancer cells into circulation.

Such a release of cancer cells would result in extensive metastasis months or even years later, long after the chemo would be suspected as the cause of the spread of the cancer. This little known horror of conventional cancer treatment needs to be spread far and wide, but it is not even listed in the side effects of Taxol.

4) Chemo/Radiation “Therapy” May Fuel Cancer Spread

Treatment may fuel cancer’s spread
Treating cancer with surgery, chemotherapy or radiation may sometimes cause tumors to spread, researchers say.
Tests in mice show that using the chemotherapy drug Doxorubicin or radiation both raised levels of TGF-beta, which in turn helped breast cancer tumors spread to the lung.

5) Chemotherapy Causes Resistance and Spread of Cancer

Peter Nelson of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle co-authored a study and published it in Nature Medicine this month detailing how chemotherapy not only produces resistance to chemotherapy by cancerous tumors but also stimulates its growth and metastasis (spread). Approximately 90% of people with metastatic cancer become resistant to chemotherapy. This occurs readily in cancers of the breast, prostate, lung, pancreas and colon.

6) Chemo Could Spread Cancer.

A new research published in Nature Medicine shows that chemotherapy can actually be extremely counterproductive in treating cancer as it could spur healthy cells to release a compound that actually stimulates cancer growth.

7) Chemotherapy can Backfire and Encourage Cancer Growth

Chemotherapy can backfire by triggering healthy cells to secrete a protein that sustains tumor growth, which could explain why some patients become resistant, a new study suggests.

8) Study Links Cancer’s Ability to Spread with Chemotherapy Resistance

Doctors who treat patients with breast cancer have known that tumors that develop resistance to chemotherapy are also more likely to grow larger and to spread, or metastasize, to other parts of the body.

9) Anti-Cancer Drugs Make Tumors More Deadly

…..new research shows that aggressive treatment (used to shrink or remove even relatively small, slow-growing or encapsulated, harmless tumors) may create a situation where the entire body is riddled with highly aggressive cancers.

This study, published in the January 17, 2012 issue of Cancer Cell,finds that a group of little-explored cells that are part of every primary cancerous tumor likely serve as important gatekeepers against cancer progression and metastasis.

10) Anti-Cancer Drugs Make Tumors More Deadly

Just imagine you were diagnosed with a cancerous tumor, and your doctor told you that his/her proposed treatment could reduce the size of your tumor by 30 percent, but at the same time increase your chances of developing secondary tumors by a whopping 300 percent!
That is exactly what is demonstrated in recent research (at Harvard and MD Anderson Cancer Centers), and published in conventional Oncology Journals! The history of conventional anti-cancer therapies is replete with cases where the treatment turned out to be far more devastating than the disease itself.

11) Exposed: Deadly Cancer Drugs Make Cancer Worse and Kill PatientsMore Quickly

Cancer drugs, pushed by many drug companies as the only ‘scientific’ method of combating cancer alongside chemotherapy, have been found to actually make cancer worse and kill patients more quickly.
The findings come after research was conducted on the cancer drugs at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. Sold at a premium price to cancer sufferers, it turns out these drugs are not only ineffective but highly dangerous.

12) Breaking News: Cancer Drugs Make Tumors More Aggressive And Deadly

…….scientists at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Comprehensive Cancer Center and UAB Department of Chemistry are currently investigating the very real possibility that dead cancer cells left over after chemotherapy spark cancer to spread to other parts of the body (metastasis).

· A study just published in the January 17 issue of the journal Cancer Cell concludes that anti-angiogenic therapies (which shrink cancer by cutting off tumors’ blood supply) may be killing the body’s natural defense against cancer by destroying pericyte cells that likely serve as important gatekeepers against cancer progression and metastasis.

Read more: http://www.infowars.com/breaking-news-cancer-drugs-make-tumors-more-aggressive-and-deadly/

13) Woops! Study Accidentally Finds Chemotherapy Makes Cancer Far Worse.

A team of researchers looking into why cancer cells are so resilient accidentally stumbled upon a far more important discovery.

While conducting their research, the team discovered that chemotherapy actually heavily damages healthy cells and subsequently triggers them to release a protein that sustains and fuels tumor growth. Beyond that, it even makes the tumor highly resistant to future treatment.

14) Chemotherapy Backfires – Causes Healthy Cells To Feed Growth Of Cancer Tumors

This protein,dubbed “WNT16B,” is taken up by nearby cancer cells, causing them to “grow, invade, and importantly, resist subsequent therapy,” said Peter Nelson of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle. He’s the co-author of the study that documented this phenomenon, published in Nature Medicine. This protein, it turns out, explains why cancer tumors grow more aggressively following chemotherapy treatments. In essence, chemotherapy turns healthy cells into WNT16B factories which churn out this “activator” chemical that accelerates cancer tumor growth.

15) Chemo and Radiation Actually Make Cancer More Malignant

The very treatments may have transformed a relatively slow growing tumor into a rapidly proliferating and invasive one.

16) Beating Cancer With Chemotherapy And Better Drugs: Junk Science?

(1) The Department of Oncology at North Sydney Cancer Centre in 2004 published a report evaluating chemotherapy over the years and concluded that ‘it only made a minor contribution to survival’. The figures they came up with were 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in America.

(2) The Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle that concluded ‘Chemotherapy can cause cancer to return’. They said CAUSE – apparently chemotherapy can cause healthy cells to produce a protein WNT16B and this is taken up by cancer cells – it helps them re-grow and even protects them from the next round of chemotherapy.

(3) A ‘landmark study’ from their Cambridge Institute showed there were 10 different ‘clusters’ of breast cancer types. ‘No longer does one size fit all’ they cried.

(4) Three research studies reported on the existence of Cancer Stem Cells at the heart of tumours. A couple of UK cancer centres (Bart’s Hospital and the Blizzard Institute, London) have even isolated these nasty little cells. Apparently, if you don’t kill them off, they can re-grow. In one of the three studies (from the University of Texas South Western Medical Centre), there were statements such as ‘Cancer Stem cells are in charge of tumours’, and the lead researcher, Dr Louis Parada and the other researchers added, ‘In the past we have tried to get rid of the entire stew of cancer cells. But shrinking a tumour by 50% is irrelevant. No current drugs tackle cancer stem cells.

(5) Perhaps the final words should therefore go to Duke’s University Medical Centre in Carolina who in their 2012 report concluded that ‘Patients with cancer are largely being mislead into believing that the drug they are being offered is somehow going to cure them’.

Lung-Liver Cancer: When Everything Went Wrong for Her

KF (S-364) is a 40-year old Indonesian lady. In 2011, she had coughs for more than a year. There was no blood in her phlegm. She took cough syrup but was not effective. In January 2013, she became breathless and found it difficult to climb the stairs. Her problem became more serious and she went to a private hospital in Tangerang. There was fluid in her lungs. Pleural tapping was performed once. But this procedure did not help her much. She was still breathless. Another tapping was done but there was no fluid.

A CT scan was performed and the doctor said there was a tumour. She was referred to a lung surgeon who told her that surgery was not indicated because her lungs could be filled with fluid and there was “not enough preparation” for him to proceed with the surgery.

Not satisfied, KF went to another lung specialist in a Jakarta hospital. Another CT scan was done, specimens were collected, etc., but the specialist could not determine the cause of her problem. The lung specialist suggested that KF’s problem could be due to “jamur” or parasites! KF was prescribed antibiotics. KF was also asked to do a biopsy, which she declined.

KF came to a private hospital in Penang in April 2013. She consulted a lung specialist. A CT done on 5 April 2013 showed:

Extensive circumferential heterogeneously enhanced lobulated masse in the left hemithorax.
There is a central fluid / necrotic area seen
Compression of the left hilar vessels and bronchi
There is infiltration into mediastinum
Trachea, oesophagus and heart are displaced to the right side
Suspicious left pericardial invasion seen
A faint hypodense nodule seen in segment 8 of the liver measuring 15 mm in diameter.
Impression: Large circumferential left hemithorax mass with liver metastasis and suspicious left pericardial invasion. Differential diagnosis: 1. Mesothelioma 2. Bronchogenic carcinoma.

A biopsy of the left chest tumour indicated poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma infiltrating the chest wall.

Immunohistology report of 20 April 2013 indicated the cells are positive for CK7 only and negative for CK20 and TTF-1.

The lung specialist referred her to a surgeon who told her surgery was not indicated for her case. KF was then referred to an oncologist. KF was prescribed 5 type of medication and one of which was Iressa. KF was asked to go home and try the Iressa and see what happen. If Iressa was not effective, KF would have to undergo chemotherapy.

A week in the private hospital cost RM 21,000. In addition she paid RM 7,000 for the medication inclusive of a month’s supply of Iressa.

KF was told Iressa would cause side effects. And she was not willing to take it. Someone living in the same apartment as she, told her about CA Care. She came to seek our help on 25 April 2013. She presented with the following:

Difficulty sleeping
No appetite
Tiredness and lack of energy
Difficulty breathing
Cough throughout the night with white phlegm.

We prescribed KF Capsule A, B, C, D and E. In addition she has to take many teas: Lung 1 and 2, Lung Phlegm, Liver 1 and 2. She was given Cough 5 for her coughs (white phlegm).

What had gone wrong?

She went to the hospital in Tangerang. Fluid was tapped out but she did not improve much. The doctor could not say if it was cancer or not. Not satisfied she went to another hospital in Jakarta. Here again there was not much help. One doctor even suggested that the problem could be due to “jamur” or parasites. I wonder how the lung expert could ever give such a suggestion! Anyway the anti-jamur medication did not work for her.
The patient came to a hospital in Penang. After a week stay she was discharged and was still not satisfied. She came to CA Care for help.
A week’s stay in the hospital cost her RM 21,000. Did she get any better? The lung specialist could not help. She was referred to a surgeon who could not solve her problem either. The next obvious stop was the oncologist. The oncologist offered five medications one of which was Iressa. The total cost of the medication was RM 7,000. She was told to try out Iressa for a month and see if this could help her! But she was not keen on Iressa because of the possible side effects. We felt sorry for KF – having made to pay for such an expensive medication which she was not willing to take.
Was Iressa prescribed based on “scientific” fact or on a trial and error basis? Immunohistology showed that cells were only positive for CK7 and negative for CK20 and TTF-1. Is this the kind of cancer that would respond to Iressa? I also do get patients who told me that she/he was asked to take Iressa in spite of the fact that test showed that the cells were negative for Iressa. But the justification given was that even for such “negative” cases Iressa seemed to work on some patients. Looks like we have to throw science out of the window!

Notes on The Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)

According to Kakiuchi et all, Gefitinib (Iressa), has shown potent anti-tumor effects and improved symptoms and quality-of-life of a subset of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, a large portion of the patients showed no effect to this agent. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15496427

Lung adenocarcinomas with mutated epidermal growth factor receptor have significant responses to tyrosine kinase inhibitors, although for unselected patients it does not appear to have a survival benefit. Both EGFR mutation and gene amplification status may be important in determining which tumors will respond to tyrosine kinase inhibitors. http://www.jthoracdis.com/article/view/87/152

The tumors that responded to the EGFR TK inhibitors (TKIs) gefitinib and erlotinib contain somatic mutations in the EGFR TK domain. The two most common EGFR mutations are short in-frame deletions of exon 19 and a point mutation (CTG to CGG) in exon 21 at nucleotide 2573. Together, these two types of mutations account for ~90% of all EGFR mutations in NSCLC. Other recurrent but far less common EGFR mutations known to be associated with sensitivity to EGFR TKIs include mutations in exon 18 and in exon 21. Screening for common EGFR mutations in patients with lung adenocarcinomas can now be performed in clinical molecular diagnostic laboratories to predict which patients will respond to EGFR TKIs. It can be performed on archival material as well as on fine-needle biopsies. http://www.nature.com/modpathol/journal/v21/n2s/full/3801018a.html

Predicting Sensitivity to Iressa and Tarceva

Iressa (gefitinib) and Tarceva (erlotinib) were being tested in large numbers of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Iressa did not improve overall survival compared to placebo treatment in previously treated NSCLC patients.

However, about 10% of Western patients treated with either of these drugs had dramatic and sometimes long-lasting responses. Investigators at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and also at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in NYC published results showing that most of these “dramatic responders” had recurring mutations in the tyrosine kinase (TK) domain of the EGFR gene.

In the NSCLC patients who have mutations in the TK domain of the EGFR. This makes the cancer cell exquisitely sensitive to dying when the switch is turned off by a drug like Iressa or Tarceva, and explains why some patients can do so well on these drugs. Although there can be mutations anywhere in the TK domain, only some of them confer sensitivity to the TKIs.

About 45% of sensitizing mutations are what are called in frame deletions in exon 19, making them the most common EGFR mutations. About 40-45% of the sensitizing mutations are point mutations in exon 21. Most of the remaining mutations don’t cause the EGFR to be sensitive to EGFR TKIs.

A point mutation in exon 20 resulting seems to allow the EGFR TK to work much better than normal. Mutations in exon 20 have also been associated with resistance.

Mutations can be detected using sequencing to identify every mutation in the tyrosine kinase domain, whether predictive of responsiveness to TKIs or not. Another method is something called allele-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) which can then be detected by a machine. This method only detects 28 of the most common EGFR mutations, but generally requires smaller amounts of tissue than sequencing and has a slightly faster turnaround time. There is also evidence that this method may be more sensitive than direct sequencing.

Quoted from: http://cancergrace.org/lung/2010/10/10/overview-of-molecular-markers-in-lung-cancer/

Read more: Practical Management of Patients With Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Gefitinib http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/23/1/165.full

WHY CONVENTIONAL CANCER TREATMENT IS FATALLY FLAWED – A DOCTOR’S VIEW

By Yeong Sek Yee and Khadijah Shaari

Is conventional cancer treatment really fatally flawed? This seems to be the opinion of Dr Margaret I. Cuomo, MD who wrote the article “Why Cancer treatment is Fatally Flawed” (Copy of article attached or view article at the following link): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/margaret-i-cuomo-md/cancer-prevention_b_1609446.html

Curious to find out more, we subsequently bought the book, “A WORLD WITHOUT CANCER” by Dr Margaret Cuomo, a board – certified radiologist (more details at the end of this article).

We would like to summarize some of the main points of Chapter 4 of this book which is surprisingly entitled “CUT, BURN AND POISON: A LOOK AT TODAY’S TREATMENT OPTIONS.” The following points sum up Dr Cuomo’s disappointment in conventional treatment (in her own words): –

a) For most of the 20^th Century, we have used 3 basic approaches to treat cancer: surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. With experimentation and practice… some modalities may have improved, yet…our results remain entirely inadequate. In crude fashion, we are still trying to cut, poison, and burn our way through cancer (pages 56/57)

b) One cancer expert has called our approach to cancer “damage control”. We deploy the heavy artillery to kill as much of the cancer as we can, hoping that it doesn’t escape our weaponry. However, all too often it does (page 10).

c) When it comes to treating cancer, we seem to be in a holding pattern (page13) Cancer has turned out to be far more clever than we imagined… it is able to develop resistance even to highly toxic drugs… it has an uncanny ability to outwit the therapeutics sent to inhibit its growth (pages 12/13).

What are Dr Cuomo’s views on cut, poison, and burn (or alternatively known as surgery, chemotherapy and radiation)?

a) Cutting : The Surgical Option

Sometimes, surgery isn’t an option. Tumors may be inoperable because they are weakened in an area that’s almost impossible to reach, or a patient may not be strong enough to withstand surgery (page 64).
Even if someone does undergo surgery, there is no way to be sure it has been successful. Although every cancer patient yearns to hear the words “we got it all,” cancer has the capacity to work in nearby tissues, even where a clear margin seems to have been obtained, or to spread undetected through the blood or lymph nodes (pages 64/65)
Today’s surgery may be safer than it was, but in many cases, it still doesn’t cure the disease. Cutting out organs and tissues does little to fight cancers peripatetic capacity to travel through the blood to colonize other parts of the body (page 13).

b) Poison: The Limits of Anti Cancer Drugs

Pharmaceuticals, collectively called systemic therapy “include 3 major groups : chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and hormonal therapy (page 65).
Whether administered as neo-adjuvant therapy (before surgery or radiation) or adjuvant (after surgery or radiation), physicians sometimes avoid the technical language and simply call them “poison” – what we want the drug to do is kill cancer cells. Unfortunately, they can kill normal cells as well… “Chemotherapy is like taking a stick and beating a dog to get rid of fleas” (page 65).
Chemotherapy can be especially grueling, with many patients receiving one drug after another. “Usually the first treatment regimen works and then it stops working after a certain point” says Dr Nicholas Vogelzang of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (page 57).
The toxic effects of chemotherapy are not limited to cancer cells. Every drug has its own package of debilitating and sometimes bizarre side effects. Some of these occur during treatment and immediately afterwards, some occur five or more years later (page 67).
According to the American Society of Clinical Oncology, late effects can strike just about anywhere in the body – including the heart, lungs, brain and spinal cord, bones and joints, endocrine and digestive system. Even dental and vision problems can occur (page 68).
When it comes to chemotherapy, no patient emerges unscathed, and the benefits may not last. If cancer cells became resistant to chemotherapy, as often happens over time, they begin to multiply again. The question for patients is always whether the gain in longevity will ultimately outweigh the brutality of the treatment (pages 69/70).
Even drugs used to treat the side effects of chemotherapy have been linked to secondary cancers (page 69).
Most of the drugs we have to fight solid tumors influence a specific part of a cellular cycle and have only a transient effect. They don’t stop the progress of a tumor indefinitely. A slow growing tumor is still growing and is perhaps beginning to spread undetected elsewhere in the body (page102).
Lastly, many drug therapies are not even studied on the basis of their impact on overall survival, but rather on their impact on progression-free survival or the maintenance of stable disease. There is a big difference (page 101).

c) Burn: Radiation Therapy

Although we have gotten much better at aiming radiation directly at a tumor, we can’t target it with the precision necessary to burn only cancer cells and leave healthy ones intact. That means that this therapy, too, is damaging (page 75).
Months or even years after radiation, chronic side effects can surface. With radiation, as with chemotherapy, the list of potential problems is lengthy (page77).
Most troubling is the possibility that other cancers will emerge, often near the original site, long after receiving radiation therapy…children who survived cancer were 15 times more likely to die of a subsequent cancer later in life (page 79).
Though the young are most vulnerable, secondary cancers can develop as a result of radiation at any age.

Flawed Clinical Trial Design:

Besides cancer treatments being fatally flawed, clinical trial designs are also flawed in the first place (page138). According to Dr Cuomo:

Good medicine is built on clinical trials in which promising scientific discoveries are tested in human beings (page 138).
Too often, clinical trials fail to discover who benefit from a therapy and who will be harmed (page140)….we need to be doing the studies that will tell us which patients require chemotherapy (page 141).
….because we don’t know the profile of those who will gain, almost all patients routinely get chemotherapy……that translates into giving therapies that fail 95% of the time in order to find that 3 to 5% of responsive patients (page 141).

Some other pertinent remarks of Dr Cuomo that are particularly succinct: –

The fact that we have made so little progress after a century of using the same basic techniques surely suggests that we aren’t taking the right approach. The problem? “Even one cancer cell can lead to death” says James Holland, MD a distinguished professor of neoplastic diseases at Mt. Sinai School of Medicine in New York City. Relapse is always a possibility until we can guarantee that there are no cancer cells in the body (page 79).
When death can come from a single cell that successfully eludes our most brutal attempts to cut, poison, and burn it the sword of Damocles hangs over every patient’s head (page 59).
We should differentiate between drugs that make a small difference and drugs that make no difference at all. A lot of cancer drugs are not worth very much in terms of prolongation of life (page 110).
Meanwhile, our continuing emphasis on producing, prescribing, and paying for one marginally useful cancer therapy after another suggests that we are in the wrong playing field (page 124).

In conclusion, when Dr Cuomo commented in The Final Word (page 244) that, when President Nixon launched “a great Crusade against cancer in 1971, he said that a long shadow of fear darkens every corner of the earth” So it is today. We need to rekindle the effort to eradicate cancer that began four decades ago (page 245).

Actually, it makes us (our personal views) wonder, whether cancer treatments are really flawed or is it made to be flawed? We can send a human to the moon but we cannot find a cure for cancer? Or is it that the cancer industry does not intend to find a cure for cancer? The answer to these questions can found on page 125 of this book (which your doctor will not recommend you to read)…it says: “the drug companies are too greedy, the FDA is too slow; doctors are rich and raking it in.”

Also, without question (Dr Cuomo’s views), fighting cancer remains highly profitable. The drug companies have all the incentive to keep their research focused on developing powerful therapies, rather than on eliminating cancer altogether (page 66).

(Yes, a cure for cancer will never be found and will never be allowed to be found!! The cancer industry does not want you to be cured and they do not want you to die so soon either….that is their window of opportunity to rake in the money. That is our views. We welcome your views.)

ISBN NO: 978-1-60961-885-8 (published October 2012)

Dr. Margaret Cuomo, the author of “A World without Cancer,” is a board-certified radiologist and an attending physician in diagnostic radiology at North Shore University Hospital in Manhasset, N.Y. for many years. Specializing in body imaging, involving CT, Ultrasound, MRI and interventional procedures, much of her practice was dedicated to the diagnosis of cancer and AIDS.

FURTHER REFERENCES:

Are there other doctors/oncologists/cancer researchers who share the same views as Dr Cuomo that conventional cancer treatment is fatally flawed, ineffective, too much collateral damage, etc? Yes, there are, some are listed and summarized below for your enlightenment. These are books which your doctors/oncologists will not recommend you to read:

1) THE COMPASSIONATE ONCOLOGIST by Dr James W. Forsythe, MD, HMD. Read why Dr Forsythe left conventional oncology and find out why conventional cancer treatment is…often it is akin to entering a dark room with a handful of darts and hoping to hit the centre of the dart-board blindly (page 127).

2) NATURAL STRATEGIES FOR CANCER PATIENTS by Dr Russell Blaylock, MD, a neuroscientist and neurosurgeon.He was the Clinical Professor of Neurosurgery at the Medical University of Mississippi. Read Chapter 3…Chemotherapy: Poisoning Cancer (and You) in which:

Dr Blaylock bluntly revealed that……“The probability that chemotherapy make tumours more aggressive, inhibit the immune system and damage vital organs were reviewed in the medical literature as far back as 1987… In many instances, chemotherapy makes the cancer more aggressive and more likely to metastasize”. (pages 78-79)

3) THE END OF ILLNESS by Dr David Argus, MD, an oncologist and Professor of Medicine. Find out why he also left conventional oncology:

When cancer is exposed to chemotherapy, drug-resistant mutants can escape. In other words, just as resistant strains of bacteria can result from antibiotic use, anticancer drugs can produce resistant cancer cells (page 37).
The number of mutations shoots up exponentially as a cancer patient is treated with drugs such as chemotherapy, which inherently causes more mutations (page 39).
When chemotherapy drugs bind to DNA, they can cause cancer just as radiation can cause cancer by mutating the genome. This helps explain why survivors of breast cancer, for instance, can suffer from leukemia later in life due to the chemotherapy they received to cure their breast cancer (page 39).

4) MONEY DRIVEN MEDICINE: TESTS AND TREATMENTS THAT DON’T WORK by Dr David K. Cundiff, an Assistant Professor in medical oncology at the Harbor-UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles.” Dr. Cundiff later left oncology and became a hospice doctor because:

“I would not recommend chemotherapy if I did not think that the benefits outweighed the risks.” I was so out of step with the other practicing medical oncologists that it became clear that I could not make a living with such a conservative treatment philosophy. Dr Cundiff just could not stomach what he saw and practiced.

5) FIGHTING CANCER WITH KNOWLEDGE & HOPE by Dr Richard C. Frank, MD, an oncologist, gives an explicit explanation as to why chemotherapy may not work for you (pages 188/190) and why targeted therapies have fallen short of its lofty goals (pages 175/184)

6) LIFE OVER CANCER by Dr Keith Block, an integrative oncologist, whose view that conventional cancer treatment is fatally flawed is reflected in the following statement on page 304:

“Cancer’s ability to continually adapt is one reason why chemotherapy and radiation are not more effective against cancer: the treatments also produce free radicals that support the disease process, allowing any cells that survive the barrage of radiation or chemotherapy to thrive.”

7)INTEGRATIVE ONCOLOGY by Dr Donald Abrams, MD and Dr Andrew Weill, both Professors of Clinical Medicine and oncologists….wrote on the toxicities of conventional treatment and…..”the well known potential to cause mutations and malignant transformation” (page 8).

8) WHAT YOU REALLY NEED TO KNOW ABOUT CANCER by Dr Robert Buckman, MD, a medical oncologist and Associate Professor, University of Toronto. In Chapter 9, he wondered…..”With so many breakthroughs, why is there no Progress?” Very thought provoking.

9) THE ENZYME FACTOR by Dr Hiromi Shinya, MD, a Clinical Professor of Surgery at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Chief of the Endoscopy Unit of Beth Israel Hospital in New York. Dr Shinya firmly believes anti-cancer drugs do not cure cancer… Read to find out why.

10) HOW WE DO HARM by Dr. Otis Webb Brawley, MD, the chief medical and executive Vice president of the American Cancer Society, and currently serves as Professor of Hematology, oncology, medicine, and epidemiology of Emory University and a fellow in Medical Oncology at the National Cancer Institute, USA. You must really read the book to find out how oncologists/doctors do harm…..contrary to the first precepts of medical ethics taught in medical school….”FIRST, DO NO HARM”

To conclude this article, allow us to quote Dr Guy Faquet, a retired hematologist / oncologist, in his book “THE WAR ON CANCER…AN ANATOMY OF FAILURE, A BLUEPRINT FOR THE FUTURE”:

“medical treatment of cancer for most of the past century was like trying to fix an automobile without any knowledge of the internal combustion engine or, for that matter, even the ability to look under the hood” (page 63).

NB: IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO READ MORE ON THE ABOVE SUBJECT MATTER, DO CALL US.