The Cancer Industry: Hype vs. Reality

Cancer medicine generates enormous revenues but marginal benefits for patients


By John Horgan on 12 February 2020


Basic Facts

  • Cancer is the second most lethal disease in the U.S., behind only heart disease.
  • More than 1.7 million Americans were diagnosed with cancer in 2018, and more than 600,000 died.
  • Almost four out of ten people will be diagnosed in their lifetime.

Big Business

  • Cancer has spawned a huge industrial complex involving government agencies, pharmaceutical and biomedical firms, hospitals and clinics, universities, professional societies, nonprofit foundations and media.
  • Total research spending since Richard Nixon declared a “war on cancer” in 1971 exceeds a quarter trillion dollars.

Big Bluff

  • Cancer-industry boosters claim that investments in research, testing and treatment have led to “incredible progress” and millions of “cancer deaths averted,”
  • Cancer experts and the media often describe new treatments with terms such as “breakthrough,” “game changer,” “miracle,” “cure,” “home run,” “revolutionary,” “transformative,” “life saver,” “groundbreaking” and “marvel.”
  • There are 1,200 accredited cancer centers in the U.S. They spent $173 million on television and magazine ads directed at the public in 2014.
  • 43 of the 48 top spenders “deceptively promot[ed] atypical patient experiences through the use of powerful testimonials.” A 2014 studyconcluded that cancer centers “frequently promote cancer therapy with emotional appeals that evoke hope and fear while rarely providing information about risks, benefits, costs, or insurance availability.”

Little Net Progress After 90 Years

What’s the reality behind the hype?  Azra Raza, an oncologist at Columbia, in her book The First Cell: And the Costs of Pursuing Cancer to the Last wrote:

  • No one is winning the war on cancer, Claims of progress are mostly hype, the same rhetoric from the same self-important voices for the past half century. 

Azra Raza, an oncologist at Columbia. She  has watched too many people die from cancer — her patients and her husband, also a cancer specialist.

New Treatments Yield Small Benefits, Big Costs

  • Pharmaceutical companies keep bringing new drugs to market. But … 72 new anticancer drugs approved by the FDA between 2004 and 2014 prolonged survival for an average of 2.1 months.
  • Most cancer drug approvals have not been shown to, or do not, improve clinically relevant end points, including survival and quality of life … the FDA may be approving many costly, toxic drugs that do not improve overall survival.
  • Costs of cancer treatments have vastly outpaced inflation, and new drugs are estimated to coston average more than $100,000/year.
  • More than 40 percent of people diagnosed with cancer lose their life savings within 2 years.


Immune therapies, which seek to stimulate immune responses to cancer, have generated enormous excitement.

Drugs firms aggressively market immune therapies, and patients are “pushing hard to try them, even when there is little to no evidence the drugs will work for their particular cancer.”

Oncologists Nathan Gay and Vinay Prasad estimated that fewer than 10 percent of cancer patients can benefit from immune therapies, and that is a “best-case scenario”.

Immune therapies trigger severe side effects, and they are also extremely expensive, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

Subsequent hospital stays and supportive care can drive the total costs to a million dollars or more … If widely prescribed, immune therapies could bankrupt the American health-care system.

Corruption In The Cancer Industry

The American approach (to cancer treatment) fosters corruption.

Many cancer specialists accept payments from firms whose drugs they prescribe. This practice leads us to celebrate marginal drugs as if they were game-changers. It leads experts to ignore or downplay flaws and deficits in cancer clinical trials. It keeps doctors silent about the crushing price of cancer medicines.

Top officials at Sloan Kettering Cancer Center “repeatedly violated policies on financial conflicts of interest, fostering a culture in which profits appeared to take precedence over research and patient care.





Breast Cancer: A story from China

GT is a 35-year-old single lady from China. About a year ago (in July 2018) she felt a lump in her left breast. She was asked to do a biopsy and probably followed by an operation. She refused.

GT works as a sales assistant in a health food company. She sells health drinks that are said to boost the immune system. Her boss gave her these “health foods” and she took these for about three months. No, the lump in her breast did not shrink.

GT then turned to TCM – Traditional Chinese Medicine. She consulted a TCM doctor in the hospital.

Chris: The TCM doctor did not ask you to operate and remove the lump in your breast?

Translator: The doctor said, “don’t cut.”

C: Did the TCM doctor say he can cure you?

Translator: Yes. This doctor is quite famous.

C: No, he did not know and he gave wrong advice!

GT was on TCM medications for almost a year. And these did not work for her either.

GT went back to the TCM  hospital again. She did a CT scan. The lump in her breast had grown bigger, to 3.8 x 1.8 cm. The cancer had spread to her lungs and bone. Unfortunately, GT did not bring along her CT scan so I am not able to see the extent of her metastasis.

C: What did the doctor say after the CT scan?

T: She was referred to other “bigger” hospital for treatment. But instead of going to the hospital she decided to fly to see you in Penang.

GT presented with breathlessness and severe coughs which make it difficult for her to sleep at night. Otherwise, she looked fine. The lump in the breast is hard and intact, not lacerated.


My advice

  1. If you were to see me earlier when you first discovered the lump, I would have asked you to remove the lump.
    This is the safest way for you. If you keep the lump in your breast it will grow bigger and one day it will burst. Do you like your lump to be like the picture below?

  1. In addition to the painful and ugly wound like above, the cancer will spread. It goes to the lymph nodes, lung, bone, liver and finally brain. So you don’t want to take such risk. The longer the cancerous lump is in your breast the higher is the risk that it will spread elsewhere.
  2. You are only 35 years old. You should not take such risk. Also, my experience showed me that breast cancer in young person tend to be aggressive. So, don’t take any chance.
  3. Now, the cancer has already spread to your lungs and bone. I don’t know how extensive it is because you did not bring along your CT scan.


I felt very sad after hearing her story. I was also upset. She was not given the “right” advice. Now her condition had deteriorated with such an “extensive” metastasis. I am afraid her recovery or survival is very slim. And this poor lady flew all the way from China to see me. What can I do? What did she expect me to do for her? That was exactly the question I asked her that morning.

GT’s reply was rather modest. She wanted me to help her with her coughs. I was glad that she did not ask me to cure her! No, I cannot cure her cancer! To help her, may be but not cure.

I spent time talking to GT trying to find out what could be the underlying problems that could have contributed to her breast cancer.

My advice to her that morning:


  1. Physical stress: Her life is too stressful. GT works from 9 a.m. to up till mid-night sometimes. She stays by herself in the city. GT’s boss suggested that she takes a long leave from her job. Yes, I fully agree with that. GT cannot survive for long under such stress.
  2. Emotional stress: What about emotional stress? GT admitted to having problems with her boy friend and she had broke off that relationship. But, she has a lump in her left breast — could it be due to a female rather than a male? GT admitted that a very close female friend had betrayed her. This had upset her very much but GT said that emotional stress has dissipated with time. I said this to GT: Learn to let go — don’t keep any ill feelings in your heart.
  3. Family support: Her parent’s home is about 4-hour-away by bullet train. Life must be hard for GT having to stay alone in a city without any family support. I suggested that GT go home and stay with her parents. She agreed.
  4. Diet: You can imagine what she eats everyday under the above situation. I can guess it cannot be healthy food every day. Unfortunately, the TCM doctor did not give good advice on this important matter. GT was told not to eat sea food and chilly. After much reading and receiving feed backs from our patients, I came to this conclusion: a) Don’t take anything that walks, including eggs and dairy products. b) No sugar c) No oily or fried foods d) Banana is bad for lung problems.
  5. Herbs bitter and awful taste: Our herbal teas are bitter and have awful taste. She needs to brew each of the teas. It takes time and effort. Will she be able to cope with that? I know most patients cannot!
  6. Monitoring: GT needs constant monitoring. After a month, I need to know how she progresses. Herbs need to adjusted. This means, GT may need to come and see me again. Or she needs to take more herbs after she finishes this first round of teas. Staying in China, how can we overcome this problem? Actually this is the problem facing most patients — even for those who live just a few hour’s drive from us. For such people, I never get to see them again after their first visit. What a waste of time and money.
  7. Financial burden: At CA Care, consultation, no matter how long it takes, is free of charge. However, we request patients to pay for the herbs. Since we started CA Care more than two decades ago, the price of our herbal teas never increase in price (in spite of the inflation). We try to be as charitable and helpful as we can. But, we understand that for GT, even flying to Penang from China cost her a lot of money. How nice if there is such a set up like CA Care in her own hometown! For GT, sad to say that I would probably not be able to see her again.


Not too long ago, I read two news reports about cancer treatment in China that make me feel real sad.

There is a movie, Dying to Survive, which has become a billion-yuan-success after being released in July this year. It is based on a  real-life story of  Lu Yong, a Chinese textile trader and leukemia patient. He imported less expensive generic drug from India and sold it to his fellow Chinese patients. Lu helped thousands of Chinese patients. Sadly, he was arrested and jailed in 2014 for doing such “illegal” activity.

This movie, Dying to Survive tells the same story in a more dramatic way.  It featured an owner of an Indian Miracle Oil Store — Cheng Yong —  who found out  that the Indian-made generic leukemia drug, Gleevec,  was sold at only 500 yuan in India. In China the authentic Gleevec is sold at 40,000 yuan, eighty times more expensive.

Lured by great profit, Cheng smuggled  the unlicensed drug to China and sold to Chinese patients at 2,000 yuan. He made good profit and he was also regarded as a hero by many cancer patients who can’t afford the original version of the expensive Gleevec. Looks like he is a real modern day Robin Hood.

Cheng became rich. He then decided to stop the drug smuggling business. He opened a garment factory. However  a large number of patients became desperate as they were forced to sell their houses or everything they have to pay for the expensive Gleevec. That prompted Cheng to change his heart, and renew his smuggling business. This time he even sold the drug only at just 500 yuan to save lives. Unfortunately, he was arrested and jailed for five years.

Note: Gleevec is developed by Novartis. In the US patients need to pay up to US$100,000 for the drug a year without government or insurance subsidy.


I got hit by another heart-breaking story. Tang is a 26-year-old doctor in Central China. He was diagnosed with oesophageal cancer, three years after graduating and starting to work. He underwent surgery to remove the tumour but declined further medical treatment.

In China, doctors like Tang, earn an average of 63,000 to 77,000 yuan (US$ 10,000 to 12,200) per year. Tang just could not afford to pay for the expensive, follow up medical treatments.

On day, Tang decided to mysteriously disappear from home. He left behind his bank cards and a letter to his parents saying they would end up having to “spend all your savings and even run into debt just for dragging out my miserable existence for a few years at best. If I let you face the financial burdens and the sorrow of losing a child in your late years, it would be a sin for which I should die a thousand times. I also don’t want to live like a near dead person for the rest of my life. So please forgive me … I’m an unworthy son, and I will pay back your love in my next life.”


After the above two stories, here I was sitting  in front of a 35-year-old lady from China who has breast cancer. I felt sad and frustrated. And this propels me to write this article.

What can we learn from these three stories?

  • The movie, Dying to Survive, has stirred discussion on the accessibility of cancer drugs and treatments in China. The original drug imported from the US are extremely expensive. But there are generic (or copy cat) drug from India which is much, much cheaper. But unfortunately smuggling cheaper drugs into China is illegal.
  • The movie has highlighted the exorbitant cost of healthcare. Not only in China, it is the same elsewhere in the developing countries. The cost of cancer drugs are being dictated by the “Cancer Establishment” of the developed nations.
  • The reality about cancer treatment is well understood by Tang, the 26-year-old cancer patient who is himself a medical doctor. After surgery, the next course of action generally is chemotherapy or/and radiotherapy. Based on his note to his parents — these treatments cost a lot of money. But will these treatments cure him? Unfortunately no.
  • Again in his note Tang explained to his parent the need to “spend all your savings and even run into debt just for dragging out my miserable existence for a few years at best. I also don’t want to live like a near dead person for the rest of my life.”
  • How many people understand what Tang wrote or understand the reality of the present day, medical cancer treatment? Cure is elusive — at best for some cancer you extend your life for another few months or years. From the experiences over the past two decades, I come to the conclusion that no one on earth can really CURE cancer. Read more here:

Second, cancer treatment is expensive.

Third, the side effects of treatments are severe and “killing.” Is it worth it?

  • But, what bugs me most is this — does this need to happen in China?

I think there is NO reason to. Why can’t the Chinese develop a much cheaper method of healing cancer? Why is there a need to depend on the expensive medical drugs imported from the US or elsewhere? I believe China can come up with a novel healing method of treating cancer if the Chinese doctors, researchers and entrepreneurs are not obsessed with following what the Western world is doing. Don’t follow others, develop your own way!

  • For more than two decades, I have devoted my life to helping cancer patients by using herbs, diet and lifestyle changes. There is nothing new about this approach. Through the ages, the Chinese sages have been telling us about this.

To the old Chinese, Indian and those who live in east, we are brought up to understand this culture very well. Unfortunately, the younger generations who come after us have failed to learn that heritage. We live like there is no tomorrow and eat “bad, branded food” introduced by the Western world — as a result metabolic diseases like diabetes, heart problem and cancer are on the rise.

  • Yes, China has the wisdom about promoting healthy life. Yes, there is TCM (Traditional Chinese Medicine) in China but I think the way it is practised needs improvement!  The story as related by this 35-year-old breast cancer from China is indeed pathetic. From her story it is clear that she did NOT get the “proper advice” for her breast cancer. This could be the result of ignorance — either of her doctors or herself.
  • Over the past two decades I have helped thousands of cancer patients without having to use those expensive drugs from the Western world. The irony is that I first learned how to help cancer patients by studying TCM on my own. Since I don’t read Chinese, I had to rely on books written in English by non-Chinese authors. Oh, how I wish I can read Chinese! In spite of his handicap, we at CA Care have done extremely well. There are some 1,000 video clips about our work in YouTube. I have written more than 700 articles about cancer healing which you can read in my blog:

Here are a few examples of our work:

  1. Hopeless case of breast cancer  from Hong Kong:
  2. Colon-liver cancer:
  3. Endometrial cancer from Australia:
  4. Melanoma-Lung:
  5. Sarcoma: Don’t do chemo you die, you do chemo also die.
  6. Cancer of the Tonsil: I outlived my two doctors!:
  7. Lymphoma Twenty Years Ago. Still alive and healthy. Is that quackery and scientifically unproven?:
  8. Ovarian-Lung Cancer: Told at most three months to live after surgery & chemo:

If I can do this in Malaysia, why can’t the Chinese do the same in China. After all, my approach to managing cancer is based on the wisdom of the old Chinese healing masters. I started with a blank mind. Then I started to read and read and read about TCM. I used my “scientific mind” to select what are useful and leave out what I thought are dubious. In other words, I develop my own method. I don’t  blindly follow  the “standard procedures.”

If Jack Ma can make Alibaba into such a great success story, I am sure there are many others like him who can also do the same with cancer. I think the real problem is to apply the right knowledge. This unfortunately is not easy  — yes, there are many doctors, sinseh and researchers in China but are they really THINKERS and INNOVATORS who know how to apply their knowledge correctly? Or are they just following “cookbook” protocols when practising their trade?

One last word about working with cancer. Cancer treatment of today is more about making  money and much less about making the patients well. This is what the “Cancer Establishment” of the developed countries is all about. So beware.

Frances M. Visco, the president of the National Breast Cancer Coalition wrote:

  • Breast cancer patients are tired of “breakthrough” therapies that do not extend life for even a day but do bring millions of dollars to industry, medical institutions and the doctors who care for us … The answer is clear, just stop circling the wagons focusing on financial gain and fame.


This is my basic principle I uphold right from the very beginning when I founded CA Care — to succeed we need dedication and compassion. If we go in there just for money — and only money — we would fail miserably. I am afraid in the Western world, cancer is indeed about money and making more money… that is why it fails so badly.

Read more here:

Let us not forget what the Great Chinese Sage and Physician, Sun Simiao said,

  • Whenever eminent physicians treat an illness … they must be free of wants and desires, and they must first develop a heart full of great compassion and empathy. They must pledge to devote themselves completely to relieving the suffering of all sentient beings.

I believe there are enough “kind and generous souls” in China or in this part of the world who want to help their fellow citizens in need. Approach cancer treatment as a noble mission to help others in need.

Some random quick facts about cancer problem in China

  • China has a massive population of 1.37 billion. Cancer is the leading cause of death in China and is a major public health problem.
  • In China in 2015: estimated 4,292,000 new cancer cases and 2,814,000 cancer deaths. Lung cancer being the most common incident cancer and the leading cause of cancer death. Stomach, esophageal, and liver cancers were also commonly diagnosed and were identified as leading causes of cancer death.


  • China has an immense cancer problem. The most common types of cancer in males were those of the lung (21.7%), stomach (19.5%), and liver (18.1%). Source: Cancer Biol Med. 2012 Jun; 9(2): 128–132.
  • In China, cancer rates are exploding … Last year, more than four million people were diagnosed with the disease and nearly three million died from it. Every day, hundreds pour into (hospitals) from all over China. People wait months for a doctor’s appointment, but often it is too late for treatment and the cancer is too advanced.


  • Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women in China … the cancer has increased at a rate of around 3.5% a year from 2000 to 2013, compared with a drop of 0.4% a yearover the same period in the US.
  • Breast cancer rates are higher in urban areas of China than in rural areas. And the higher the population density, the higher the rate.


P/S: It is sad to note that this young lady, GT died about two weeks later.




No chemo for me. My husband died within minutes after completion of his 6th cycle of chemo

Julie (not real name) is a 54-year-old Indonesia. She was initially diagnosed with TB (tuberculosis) and has been taking TB medication for the past seven months. No, her problems did not go away.

Blood tests showed her CEA was at 39.7 (high) and a CT scan showed a mass in her lung.

The doctor wanted her to do a biopsy and if it is cancerous, Julie would have to undergo chemotherapy. Julie do not want chemotherapy. My question to her, “Why don’t you want to go for chemo?”

Julie had a bitter experience to share.

About 5 years ago (in around February 2013) Julie’s husband was diagnosed with colon cancer. He underwent an operation — performed by one of the best colorectal surgeons in Singapore. He was then sent to a well known Singapore private hospital for chemotherapy. Chemotherapy was started in June and by December Julie’s husband was dead.

After receiving 3 cycles of chemo, he had difficulty walking.

Chris: “Did you still continue with the chemo?”

In spite of the early warning that something had gone wrong, the oncologist still wanted the patient to finish the scheduled six cycles. Julie’s husband eventually completed the six cycles of chemo. Within a few minutes of completing this last cycle — after the “needle” was removed from his arm — he died.

C: “Did you ask the oncologist why your husband died?”

The oncologist said his heart could not stand the toxic drug.

C: Before you started the chemo, did you ever ask the oncologist if chemo can kill?”

The oncologist said the chemo is going to cure him!

C: “In total, how much money did you spend for his treatment?”

About one milyar (one billion) rupiah.


This is a story of two tragedies. One, Julie had been taking TB drug for the past 7 months because the doctor thought she had TB. She was not getting better.

Julie said every day, throughout the day, she has pain and numbness on the right side of her chest. Once a while blood oozed out from her right ear. She could not sleep at night because of her cough. She had no appetite and felt tired all day long. She became breathless when climbing the stairs.

The doctor was monitoring her progress through X-rays. It was not until May 2018 that a CT scan was done. After seeing the scan, it was not about TB anymore. Could it be lung cancer? Or to be more precise, could it be a metastatic lung cancer?

Why did I say metastatic lung cancer?

Julie told us that in 2011, she had a hysterectomy. Then in 2013, she again had an operation to remove her ovary. I asked Julie if the doctors at the time ever indicated that she had some sort of cancer? Julie did not know. It was indeed unfortunate that such medical history was not taken into account (perhaps they did not even want to know?) when the doctors came to the conclusion that she had TB.

Tragedy number two. Julie was told that she would have to undergo chemotherapy if the biopsy turns out to be positive. No chemo for me — that is Julie’s position. Her husband was killed by that kind of treatment.

Julie specially flew to Penang to seek our help. Yes, we understand her predicament.  I have heard many such stories before. If you have colon cancer you don’t have to die within 6 months even if you don’t do any chemo. We have patients living ten years and more, after surgery but without any chemo. So the story of Julie’s husband  is  pathetic.

I spent almost an hour trying to help her in any way I can. I have also reminded Julie that I cannot cure her — to help yes, but to cure, NO. In a situation like this we can only do our best to heal ourselves. But first and foremost she must be willing to help herself. Are you prepared to take that responsibility?

You don’t have to wait until your partner dies before you believe what these doctors said:





NPC: Undergo chemotherapy,100 percent cure; if radiotherapy, 80 percent cure. You believe that?

Dear DR Chris Teo,

I apologize for writing without the benefit of an introduction, I am writing this email, with hope that I can scheduled an appointment with you, on behalf of my father who has been diagnosed with nose cancer(T2N1).

My father, Aba (not real name), 58 years old, has been diagnosed with nose cancer (T2N1) in February 2017 and was scheduled for 33 sessions of radiotherapy and 6 rounds of chemotherapy (4 hrs of cisplatin IV infusion),with an approximate total cost of SGD$9,700.

He declined the chemotherapy treatment (oncologists here are very persistent, we had to go thru series of ‘debates’) but complied to radiotherapy treatments. We was initially ensured a total recovery. Doctor mentioned that only 30% suffered from mild side effects and seeing my father is young he is confident that my father will be able to spring back to life in seconds.

Little did we knew, radiotherapy is just as bad. He is currently on his 13th session. The tormenting days started as early as day 2.  He is unable to eat maybe because of the many big ulcers, sudden chills, fever, nausea/vomiting and scalded skin. He is so weak. And ever since radiotherapy, I noticed he started to develop tight congestive cough at night. As of now, he said he had lost his sense of taste and hearing to his right ear.

On 6/6/17, during a scheduled consultation, we expressed our concern on his deteriorating health, and if there is anything that they can provide to aid him during this time, and they mentioned a few lists of medications in which they don’t recommended.  Their only advice is to allow his antibody to fight it off naturally. At the end of the day, we was only prescribe with a tin of Ensure Vanilla powder.

Disappointed with their lack of concerned and couldn’t help feeling betrayed, that was when we finally decided to called it off and stop the radiotherapy treatments.

It has been more than 48 hrs from his last radiotherapy session and he doesn’t seems to be getting any better.

Our family do believe in herbs but we have no knowledge on it.  He has been taking rodent tuber and  jus rerama (butterfly plant)  as supplements for almost a month now. We sincerely hope you are willing to look into my father’s case.  My father is eager to take all possible aggressive measures to combat this disease or at least to live peacefully with it.

We understand that this is one of many such requests that come across your desk and greatly appreciate any guidance that you can lend. We live in Singapore and ensure that I have no issues travelling to Penang on behalf of my father for the consultation and also the follow up treatments.

Thank you, in advance, for your help. I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

Best of regards.

Reply: Come and see me with all the medical reports and scans … no need to bring your father … only you come ….. fly in the morning … go back in late afternoon. 

Summary of medical reports:

  1. 9 Feb. 2017: Right PNS biopsy — Non-keratinizing papillary squamous cell carcinoma.
  2. 23 Feb. 2017: MRI – Nasopharynx and Neck — right nasopharyngeal mass (4.8 x 3.9 x 3.0 cm) with extension across midline and into the right parapharyngeal space with right mastoid effusion. Enlarged right lateral retropharyngeal node, 1.4 x 1.2 cm.
  3. 23 Feb. 2017: Bone scan — there is no conclusive scan evidence of bone metastasis.
  4. 5 April 2017: Diagnosed with T2N1 nasopharyngeal cancer, EBV negative, p16 positive.
  5. 30 May 2017: MRI — Since the previous MRI stuy dated 23 Feb. 2017
  • stable size and extent of the known right nasopharyngeal tumour.
  • slightly larger right lateral retropharyngeal lymph nodes — 1.5 x 1.2cm fro, 1.4 x 1.1 cm.
  • larger cystic right level 2 lymph node suspicious for nodal metastasis — 2.2 x 1.5 cm fro, 1.3 x 0.7 cm.

Aba’s daughter (let’s call her Linda) and her husband came to seek our help. We talked for more than an hour. Below are some excerpts of our conversation that morning.



Here are some of the points we discussed.

  1. Do chemo, 100 percent cure, if radiotherapy 80 percent cure

Linda: He was told to go for chemo – 6 times and radiotherapy – 35 times. He declined chemo but went along with radiotherapy.

Chris: Chemo! Can cure or not?

L: The doctor said, 100 percent cure with chemo. The doctor also said if the patient is my father or mother, I would also ask him/her to do the same.

C: So chemo can cure 100 percent. What about radiotherapy?

L: If he did radiotherapy it will be 80 percent cure.

  1. Only 30 percent of patients will suffer mild side effects of radiation

L: The doctor also said that only 30 percent of patients will suffer from mild side effects of radiation.

C: Mild side effects? That’s what the doctor said?

L: The doctor said my father is still young.

C: Did you father know that the doctor said the radiation side effects is very mild?

L: He knew.

C: And after 13 times of radiation, why did he gave up?

L: He had bad mouth ulcers, etc. When to see the doctor and was told no medication to help him. Only let the body’s antibodies (immune system?) help him.

  1. Why are you so against chemotherapy?

C: Chemo would give a 100 percent cure — why don’t you ask your father to go for chemo?

Son-in-law: He wanted to go for it.

L: I quarrelled with the doctor. I have read a lot of stories. Even my uncle — he had one cycle of chemo for his colon cancer and he wanted to die already. Only one shot, and want to die already.

  1. Oncologist pushing my father to go for chemo!

L: The doctor was very, very …

SIL: insisting.

L: When I told the doctor that I don’t want my father to go for chemo, she was like trying to put the blame on me — if my dies, I would be the one responsible for it.

C: The doctor was really pushing you on that? How old is this oncologist?

L: She is a young lady doctor.

SIL: Some  young doctors are like that! Very pushy — chemo, chemo, chemo!

L: She said, this is the standard American protocol.

C: (From my experience) Nobody can cure any cancer! There is another young oncologist who told one of our patients. In my professional life as an oncologist, I have not come across a case where a patient dies because of my chemotherapy!

  1. Fellow patient undergoing the same treatment already died!

L: There was another patient who also underwent the same treatment (like my father in the same hospital). Last week my father asked the nurse what had happened to him. The nursed checked and found out that he already died.

  1. Mom with colon cancer. Surgery but refused chemo. Ten years still alive!

L: I read a lot.

C: Before you father got cancer, did you also read?

L: Actually my mother also had cancer — colon cancer. She went for surgery but she refused chemo. It’s now ten years. She never go for any check-up and she is still alive.

7. My take on this case

  • We cannot change human attitude. So let me tell you honestly — out of ten patients who come and seek our help, only three patients would benefit from our therapy. We cannot help the remaining seven patients because we cannot change their attitudes. We can help the cancer but we cannot help human beings.
  • You need to take care of your diet. You cannot eat anything you like. So what to eat now? I can’t help people like that! I know many people swear and curse me because I say you cannot eat this and cannot eat that.

SIL: My father is a very stubborn person. He likes to eat — so we have to change him on that.

C: That is the problem. I have no herbs to make him change his attitude, his stubbornness. I can tell you, I give up on such person. No use. My experience is when he gets well, he will not listen to my advice anymore. He eats anything he likes and he dies.


There are many lessons we can learn from this story.

  1. It pays to read and read, to know more. It is not enough to just go and see an oncologist and believe he/she can take care of you.

Linda read about her father’s cancer treatment. She took note that her uncle almost died after one shot of chemo. Linda’s mother also had cancer. She was told to undergo chemotherapy after her colon cancer surgery. She refused. She is still alive after ten years!

When the oncologist told Aba and his family members that chemo was going to provide a one hundred percent cure of his NPC, Linda was skeptical. You can only be skeptical and dare to question the doctor if you have some basic knowledge of what cancer treatment is all about. Unfortunately, many patients dare not ask. And they don’t read. They swallow everything that is being fed to them!


  1. Experience and wisdom are what you need to look out for when it comes to making life and death decision. Read and ponder the following wise words of Dr. Ruggeiri below.

It is not difficult to understand what Dr. Paul Ruggieri is trying to tell us. Substitute the word surgeon with oncologist and see how the message strikes you! It may sound like this … the first ten years of practice, an oncologist learns how to chemo people …. she is eager to chemo anyone who walks into her office … she is going to show off her stuff …. bla, bla, bla.

So if I have a choice, I would choose an experienced, sympathetic and wise doctor rather than a sweet, young one! (I know it is hard, wishful thinking?).


  1. Radiotherapy provides a 80 percent chance of cure. And only 30 percent of patients suffer side effects. Even that, according to the oncologist, these side effects are mild. Do you believe that?

Obviously this oncologist does not know what it is like to suffer from the treatments she is dishing out to her patients!

Pastor Danny had NPC and underwent chemotherapy and radiation treatments (using the same drugs as recommended for Aba). And he suffered severe side effects.

  • Suffered severe side effects of radiation – mouth sore, difficulty swallowing, burnt skin, etc.
  • At the same time, he received two cycles of chemotherapy.  The side effects were worse than radiation and he had to be hospitalized. He was unable to sleep, was in pain and became anxious and depressed. He was put on morphine and as a result suffered constipation and hallucination.
  • The treatment caused much misery. I would rather die – it was miserable and never again!

Read more:

Dr. Peter Ooi related his NPC treatments as below:

Radiotherapy Experience

  • The treatment burnt my whole throat – like it was on fire.
  • My wife cried, because I couldn’t drink even a drop of water.
  • I could not walk by myself.
  • I was not told about the side effects of radiotherapy.
  • I have no more salivary glands (that is why in the video you see Peter having to taking sips of water very often when talking to us). 

Chemo Experience

  • I was not told about the side effects of chemotherapy – the only thing mentioned was hair loss.
  • I stopped chemo after the fourth cycle – I was too weak.
  • I developed a phobia for “needle”. The veins in my hands just “disappeared” when I see a needle!

Read more:

Doc, you call these mild side effects?

  1. The oncologist told Linda that chemotherapy can provide a one hundred percent cure! What the oncologist did not tell is that chemotherapy can also come with a heavy toll! Sometimes, chemotherapy kills.

According to Linda, a fellow patient undergoing the same treatment as her father died along the way!  Is that not proof enough? Read what these two doctors say.

Last week the newspapers reported that one of Singapore’s most prominent oncologist was suspended for eight months due to professional misconduct. According to this report, Dr. Ang Peng Thiam, a 35-year veteran and medical director of Parkway Cancer Centre, was found guilty of these charges:

  • That he made false representation to the patient who was suffering from lung cancer that there was a “70 per cent” chance of responding to the treatment he suggested, and
  • That he failed to offer her surgery as an option.

The patient died six months after seeing this famous oncologist.

The disciplinary tribunal found that Dr Ang “had no reasonable basis” for saying there was a 70 per cent chance of response and felt that he had “wrongly held out false hope” to the patient and her family. He made the claims intentionally even though he knew or ought to have known there was no basis for him to do so.

The judges said doctors were obliged to present the range of viable options and what the pros and cons of each of these were. Patients must get to decide for themselves what treatment they want, the judges added. “It was not Dr Ang’s role to decide, but to inform,” the judges said.

Cancer patients, can you learn anything from the above episode?

Read more:

Let me end by asking you once again to reflect on the wise words of Dr. Ruggieri below:





Part 4: More treatments, more medical bills. But will these cure you?


SF was diagnosed with cancer. She came to Penang to undergo the necessary treatment. Initially after chemotherpy, the tumours shrunk and the oncologist told her she was cured! But it was not true. The tumours grew back again after one month. SF was asked to go for radiation followed by more chemo.  Then she has to go for surgery. That means more medical bills, but the big question remained unanswered: Can the treatments cure her cancer? She wanted a cure. Is cure possible?



C: They asked you for go for 5 sessions of radiation and then chemotherapy. If the tumour shrinks they want to remove the tumour. In addition they want to remove your right kidney and the urinary tube.  Okay, let me know – do you have any problem urinating now? If you cannot urinate, I see the need to operate immediately. But you look well and healthy. I also agree that if you get those tumours removed, the cancer will all be gone. But can surgery cure your cancer?

Husband: Right.

C: What if I say that surgery will not cure your cancer?

Consultation without charge

C: At CA Care we have the responsibility to advise patients who come to us. We are committed to give honest evaluation of your situation. We give advice without having an ulterior motive of wanting to sell our therapy. I have made a promise that I shall do my best to read and learn — to be knowledgeable. And I shall share that knowledge with those who need it without charging any fee, no matter how long I talk to them. Most important, I don’t want to mislead patients. But as much as we want to help, please also know that I am not god. I can only do my best.

Go for medical treatments, you die. Follow our CA Care Therapy, you also die. What is your choice?

C:  Let me ask you one question, frankly and bluntly. If you go ahead and undergo the medical treatments as suggested by your doctors — i.e. radiation, chemo, surgery, etc. — for sure, you will have more medical bills to settle! And at the end of it all, there is no cure and  you die. Are you satisfied with this route?

P: No, I am not happy with that.

C: I understand because even if you do all these treatments, no one can guarantee that you will be cured. There was one lady from Medan. She had breast cancer and underwent surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, etc.. The treatment lasted 3 years but the cancer did not go away. She had to go into the ICU twice after her chemotherapy. She had to sell a piece of land to pay for her medical bills. During one visit to her oncologist she asked, Why is it, after 3 years already, you still cannot cure me? The oncologist replied, Ibu your cancer cannot be cured. This lady decided to give up chemotherapy and came to seek our help. It was too late, even her liver was “gone”! The daughter said, We felt cheated by all these. Yes, I understand. To me, I believe patients should be told well ahead of time the probable outcome of the treatment — even before embarking on any treatment. In this case, she was told the truth only at the very end of the game.

Now, do you understand what I am trying to tell you?

This brings me to another point. You come and see me. Can I cure you? My frank and blunt answer is, No, I cannot cure you. So if you take my herbs and follow my advice — after a month or two you feel healthy and well — can eat, can sleep, can move around but may have some pains here and there. Are you satisfied? Then one day you die. Are you ready to die without undergoing the medical treatments? Tell me, which path do you want to follow.

P: Yes, I am prepared to take this path.

C:  Are you sure?

P: Yes.

Husband: Now that you have explained to us clearly, we understand.

C: There is this man who came to see me. His father had lung cancer that had spread to his brain and was semi-conscious in the hospital. The doctors did a biopsy and then gave him 5 sessions of radiation (which cost RM6,000). The man told me, I want my father to live.


I shook my head in despair. I told him, It is better to bring your father home quickly when he is still breathing. It would cost you a lot of money (RM 8,000 instead of RM200) if you have to bring him home in a coffin.

I also told him, There is no need to fight. You cannot win. No chance. Commonsense tells me that 5 sessions of radiation is not going to cure anything! Let us be realistic and honest about this.

Let us understand that all of us will have to die one day. But many say they don’t want to give up easily. They want to fight and fight until death. That is okay with me. Be a fierce fighter. Ibu do you also want to fight until you die? Or are you prepared to say, Okay, I want to live as long as I can without sufferings. When the time comes for me to go, I shall go I don’t want to put up a fight.

Fighting may mean sufferings. Ibu, what is your choice?

P: I want to take your herbs and shall leave everything else to God. If God says I have to go, I shall go.

C: Are you prepared for that? You will not get angry at me if you cannot find a cure?

P: No, our life is in God’s hand. When I came here for medical treatment, I did not understand all these. I really did not understand why the initial treatment did not cure me and the cancer came back. Now, I understand what is going on. Nobody talked to me like this before.

Husband: We came to consult you. Probably God had opened a way for us.

C: People often tell me that God led them to us. May be God did that, but I also need to remind everyone that to get well is also our responsibility. So again, I want you to think carefully before you make this important decision.

P: I have made up my mind. I don’t want any more chemo.

Understanding the CA Care Therapy

  1. Take care of your diet. Those who follow our dietary advice do not die because they cannot eat this or that.
  2. After talking to a patient for 5 minutes, I would know his/her attitude. Cancer is about human being. If you want to get well you have to change — change your lifestyle, your diet, your attitude. I don’t have herbs to make you change. You have to want to change yourself.
  3. Don’t worry so much. Make time for yourself and go for exercise, meditate, etc.
  4. Take the herbs. But remember, these are not magic potion. They don’t cure your cancer.

So, with all of the above — clean mind, clean diet, clean body and with God’s help, I hope you body heals itself.

Tell the tumour inside you, Let’s live together and let’s not give each other any problem. You don’t disturb me and I don’t disturb you. One day, when I die, you –the tumour– will also die along with me. But if you grow too much, I will die earlier and you also die with me. So let us live in peace. If you have this kind of attitude, you will have peace of mind. But if you fight with the tumour, you will suffer. Undergo all those treatments, you suffer. But at the end, you also die.

So, it better that you learn how to live with your cancer. There is no further need to do any more CT scan or PET scan if you don’t want to go for medical treatment. Do all these for what? Nobody can do anything anyway.

One day, if you can’t live a normal life, that means the cancer has come back. I can’t help you anymore. Go to the hospital and ask the doctor to chemo you. Accept reality — if you die, so be it. What else can we do?

So, Ibu you need to understand what can happen if you take this alternative option.

Be grateful

There is this man who had his kidney removed due to cancer. He was asked to undergo follow up chemo. He refused. He did not want to suffer. So he decided to follow our therapy. Now, he is doing fine. He is able to travel the world. He and his wife went to China. Just recently, they went to Portugal. His wife said, He followed your advice. He is happy. No problem at all. He is normal. If he went for chemo, he would surely suffer. So life is good for us. One day, when he has to die, so be it.

So Ibu, I want you to decide carefully.

P: I want to follow your therapy.

C: Are you sure of that? And you would not blame me if things don’t turn out well?

P: No, no, we will not blame you. Please help me right from today.


  1. This indeed a hard case to handle. If I have a choice, I would not want to take on this case. But I cannot betray our principle that we are here to help the “helpless and the hopeless.” I felt real sorry that SF was let down by her first oncologist. However, I need to remind everyone that not all patients who come to us benefit from our therapy. Only 30 percent would probably benefit, the rest cannot. It is all about you — your belief, your commitment and your willingness to change.
  2. In part 3 of this story, I raised the issue of money. Many people would disagree with me on this. To many of us who benefit from treating those who are dying, the argument is life is valueless. Many would say, if you are going to die why let money stop you from doing what is best! One oncologist told one patient, If you don’t have any more money to pay me, ask your husband to go and rob the bank. Indeed crude.

But look at this problem of money from the viewpoint of the one who has to pay the expensive medical bills. For these common people, raising money to pay the medical bills means selling the house the family is staying in.

I recalled Pak Jam who came to us, looking disoriented and broken. He had to spent RM2,000 per day on his wife who was undergoing chemotherapy for her leukemia in a private hospital. After 2 weeks he said all his savings were gone. He resorted to borrowing from friends and relatives. He came to seek our help because he could not afford treatment anymore. I told him to bring his wife home quickly. Don’t die in Penang. He followed my advice. His wife took the herbs and continued to life for another 3 years! She died because she went for a blood transfusion and they put in the wrong blood type into her!

  1. In this story, I appeared to be against chemo and surgery. No, I am not anti-medical treatments. But at the same time I also know through experience that these treatments can kill or do not cure cancer. This is an undeniable reality. Let me lists some of my experiences.
  • One lady had a hysterectomy in Jakarta. The surgeon told the patient, You need to go for chemo after this. The patient asked, Can chemo cure me? The surgeon replied, I was practising in Germany for more than 30 years before I came back to Jakarta. I sent ten patients for chemo, ten patients died!
  • As I was writing this story, one lady form Kuala Lumpur came. She had a big ovarian tumour. She consulted a surgeon in a private hospital who told her. Surgery is not going to cure you. But after surgery, you need to go for chemotherapy. Chemotherapy is not going to cure you either!
  • A lady from Surabaya was asked to go for chemotherapy for her gallbladder cancer. She refused. Why? She said, My 39-year-old son had lung cancer. He died after undergoing 5 or 6 cycles of chemo. That’s the reason why I don’t want to do chemo.

Ella from Melbourne had a big tumour removed. Her doctor said she must do for chemotherapy. No chemo, you have three months. With chemo, it would be two-and-a-half years. This means even with chemotherapy, Ella would not be cured. Ella refused chemotherapy and opted for our therapy. Ella remains well up to this day (since November 2008).

Cancer: Is doing nothing an option?

If you or someone in your family is diagnosed with cancer, you may wish to take time and reflect on the following.


  1. In 2012, there were 37,400 new cancers and in the same year 21,700 died of cancer. That’s a lot of death due to cancer, in spite of them being treated?
  2. The most common cancers in Malaysia are: colon, lung, NPC (nose), lymphoma and prostate for men. For women — breast, colon, cervical, ovarian and lung.
  3. We do not know WHO will get WHAT cancer in our lifetime. But do we have to wait until we get cancer to know what went wrong? That would be too late!

We know that bad diet (e.g. smoking, excessive sugar intake, alcohol, etc.) and unhealthy lifestyle can lead to cancer. Instead of spending so much money to treat cancer why don’t we spend money to learn how to “prevent” or minimize the chances of getting cancer in the first place? Bah, who is interested in that!


  1. The cost of cancer treatments is expensive. You may need to spend all your lifetime savings, pawn your jewelleries or sell your property — land, house, etc., to pay for these treatments.

2-economic-impact-of-chemo-drugs 3-hospital-bill 4-costly-to-die 5-brancrupt-rate-in-us

  1. What if we do nothing?



  1. What ???? … you may die sooner if you undergo all those treatments dished out to you. Doc., you can’t be right on this?


  1. What ??? again ???? … chemotherapy is a waste of money?

  1. Hi doc., you must be joking, right?






More advice ….read what Dr. Gilbert Welch wrote:


gilbert-welch-do-nothing-is-better gilbert-welch-fight-the-battle-to-the-end





Ten ways how doctors in India cheat patients

Someone in India sent us the link to this article. Thanks for sharing!

A renowned physician Dr B M Hegde has shown how a large number of doctors working in five-star hospitals shortchange  patients in order to keep their management happy and enrich their own pockets.


Prof. B. M. Hegde, MD, FRCP, FRCPE, FRCPG, FRCPI, FACC, FAMS. Padma Bhushan Awardee 2010.Editor-in-Chief, The Journal of the Science of Healing Outcomes, Chairman, State Health Society’s Expert Committee, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.Former Prof. Cardiology, The Middlesex Hospital Medical School, University of London, Affiliate Prof. of Human Health, Northern Colorado University, Retd. Vice Chancellor, Manipal University, “Manjunath”Pais Hills, Bejai. MANGALORE-575004. India.

He said:

  • To a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Surgeons like to solve medical problems by cutting, just as physicians first seek solutions with drugs. So, if you take your medical problem to a surgeon first, the chances are that you will unnecessarily end up on the operation table. Instead, please go to an ordinary GP first.

Read more …

1)      40-60% kickbacks for lab tests.
When a doctor (whether family doctor / general physician, consultant or surgeon) prescribes tests – pathology, radiology, X-rays, MRIs etc. – the laboratory conducting those tests gives commissions. In South and Central Mumbai — 40%. In the suburbs north of Bandra — a whopping 60 per cent! He probably earns a lot more in this way than the consulting fees that you pay.

2)      30-40% for referring to consultants, specialists & surgeons.
When your friendly GP refers you to a specialist or surgeon, he gets 30-40%.

3)      30-40% of total hospital charges.
If the GP or consultant recommends hospitalization, he will receive kickback from the private nursing home as a percentage of all charges including ICU, bed, nursing care, surgery.

4)      Sink tests.
Some tests prescribed by doctors are not needed. They are there to inflate bills and commissions. The pathology lab understands what is unnecessary. These are called “sink tests”; blood, urine, stool samples collected will be thrown.

5)      Admitting the patient to “keep him under observation”.
People go to cardiologists feeling unwell and anxious. Most of them aren’t really having a heart attack, and cardiologists and family doctors are well aware of this. They admit such safe patients, put them on a saline drip with mild sedation, and send them home after 3-4 days after charging them a fat amount for ICU, bed charges, visiting doctors fees.

6)      ICU minus intensive care.
Nursing homes all over the suburbs are run by doctor couples or as one-man-shows. In such places, nurses and ward boys are 10th class drop-outs in ill-fitting uniforms and bare feet. These “nurses” sit at the reception counter, give injections and saline drips, perform ECGs, apply dressings and change bandages, and assist in the operation theatre. At night, they even sit outside the Intensive Care Units; there is no resident doctor. In case of a crisis, the doctor — who usually lives in the same building — will turn up after 20 minutes, after this nurse calls him. Such ICUs admit safe patients to fill up beds. Genuine patients who require emergency care are sent elsewhere to hospitals having a Resident Medical Officer (RMO) round-the-clock.

7)      Unnecessary caesarean surgeries and hysterectomies.

Many surgical procedures are done to keep the cash register ringing. Caesarean deliveries and hysterectomy (removal of uterus) are high on the list. While the woman with labour -pains is screaming and panicking, the obstetrician who gently suggests that caesarean is best seems like an angel sent by God! Menopausal women experience bodily changes that make them nervous and gullible. They can be frightened by words like ” cysts” and “fibroids” that are in almost every normal woman’s radiology reports. When a gynaecologist gently suggests womb removal “as a precaution”, most women and their husbands agree without a second’s thought.

8)      Cosmetic surgery advertized through newspapers.

Liposuction and plastic surgery are not minor procedures. Some are life-threateningly major. But advertisements make them appear as easy as facials and waxing. The Indian medical council has strict rules against such  misrepresentation. But nobody is interested in taking action.

9)       Indirect kickbacks from doctors to prestigious hospitals.

To be on the panel of a prestigious hospital, there is give-and-take involved. The hospital expects the doctor to refer many patients for hospital admission. If he fails to send a certain number of patients, he is quietly dumped. And so he likes to admit patients even when there is no need.

10)  “Emergency surgery” on dead body.
If a surgeon hurriedly wheels your patient from the Intensive Care Unit to the operation theatre, refuses to let you go inside and see him, and wants your signature on the consent form for “an emergency operation to save his life”, it is likely that your patient is already dead. The “emergency operation” is for inflating the bill; if you agree to it, the surgeon will come out 15 minutes later and report that your patient died on the operation table. And then, when you take  delivery of the dead body, you will pay OT charges, anaesthesiologist’s charges, blah-blah-Doctors are humans too. You can’t trust them blindly.

Related articles:

On top of consultation fee, she had to pay RM1,700 to the oncologist —  referral fee for radiation!

What Doctors Don’t Get to Study in Medical School by Professor B.M. Hegde




Why do cancer drugs get such an easy ride?

BMJ 2015350 doi: (Published 23 April 2015)Cite this as: BMJ 2015;350:h2068

Donald W Light, professor and Joel Lexchin, professor 

Rushed approvals result in a poor deal for both patients and cancer research

Unlike most other diseases, cancer instils a special fear and “is treated as an evil, invincible predator, not just a disease.”

The ability of drug companies to charge very high prices, even when most approved cancer drugs provide little gain for patients, drives much of the research, as desperate patients lead some governments and private insurers to pay whatever companies charge.

Officials within the US Food and Drug Administration are enthusiastic about new cancer drugs. Richard Pazdur, who oversees oncology activities for the FDA says that new cancer drugs are so effective that “We don’t have a lot of questions on [these] drugs because they’re slam dunks. It’s not if we’re going to approve them. It’s how fast we’re going to approve them.”

The methodological weaknesses in oncology trials do not support such enthusiasm.

Trials for cancer drugs were 2.8 times more likely not to be randomised, 2.6 times more likely not to use a comparator (single arm), ….

and to READ MORE ….. Article access for 1 day: Purchase this article for £23 $37 €30 *

If you don’t have the money to pay for a one day access to this article, try “googling” the subject matter, and with some luck you get a “free ride” and enjoy comments from various sources.

From Highly priced cancer drugs get rushed approvals despite poor trial methodology and little effect on the longevity of patients, cautions York University Professor Dr. Joel Lexchin in the School of Health Policy and Management.

“Patients and their doctors should demand that regulators require pharma companies to provide clear evidence of clinical effectiveness of the drugs, resulting from rigorous methodology,” suggests Lexchin. “Drug agencies like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicine Agency (EMA) don’t actually look at whether people live longer.”

In an article in the British Medical Journal, titled “Why do cancer drugs get such an easy ride?,” Lexchiin and co-author Donald Light, a professor in the School of Osteopathic Medicine, Rowan University in New Jersey, note that accelerated approval and shortened review times also make it a smooth sail for cancer drugs.

Lexchin cites earlier research reviewing solid cancer drugs within 10 years of EMA approval to point out that these drugs improved survival by just over a month.

“Similarly 71 drugs approved by the FDA from 2002 to 2014 for solid tumours have resulted in median gains in progression-free and overall survival of only 2.5 and 2.1 months, respectively,” he says adding, “Also, only 42 per cent met the American Society of Clinical Oncology Cancer Research Committee’s criteria for meaningful results for patients.”

From: How Effective Are Newer Chemotherapy Drugs?

  • An editorial in the April 23, 2015 British Medical Journal examined the recent accelerated drug approval process for cancer drugs in both the US and Europe. The subtitle was “Rushed approvals result in a poor deal for both patients and cancer research.”
  • This editorial contains some extremely disturbing statistics and information the authors obtained from reviewing the chemotherapy clinical study literature and other papers over the last 8 to 10 years.
  • Between 2007 and 2010, … almost 9000 oncology clinical drug trials were compared with trials for other diseases, the former were 2.6 times more likely not to use a comparator and 1.8 time more likely not be blinded (open to bias from the investigators) … this undermine the validity of the outcomes, it also reflect what regulators will allow. (In lay man language this means bad research. And the regulators — FDA, allows that!).
  • The European Medicine Agency … found that new oncology drugs improved survival by a mean of 1.5 months and a median of 1.2 months.
  • The 71 drugs approved by the US FDA from 2002 to 2014 for solid tumors have resulted in median gains in progression-free survival of 2.5 months and overall survival of 2.1 months. (Pay thousands of ringgit plus suffer side effects and you live 2.5 months longer? Not cured? As you told about this before you started paying though your nose?).
  • Post-marketing changes in the package insert (so-called label) were substantially greater for oncology drugs given priority approval as compared to those going through the much longer standard process, which the authors suggest reflects deficiencies in the accelerated review process. (In layman language it means, quicky, sloppy job — a rush to make quick bucks?)
  • Both the European and US regulators allow companies to test cancer drugs using a surrogate endpoint rather than survival or other more patient-centered outcomes. Tumor size is given as an example of an unreliable endpoint since it is highly variable in predicting overall survival. (In layman language the measure of trial outcome is not reliable. Just making the size of tumor smaller — or tumour shrinkage — may not mean anything. Surely it does not mean the cancer is cured! So, the measure of effectiveness is faulty).
  • In 2013, two peer-reviewed papers appeared where a total of over 100 oncologists protested against the high prices being charged for cancer drugs when 11 out of 12 approved in 2012 provided only small benefits for patients. (Do you realize that chemo drugs are getting more expensive …the prices of the newer drugs are beyond our imagination. But are they effective? Yes, make you live longer by 2 or 3 months????? But patients want a CURE)
  • The authors term the approval process an “Easy Ride” and suggest that this serves both patients and research badly.
  • It can also be argued that the majority of cancer drug development research currently leading to new drug approval is bogged down in merely getting more ineffective drugs approved in the hope that marginal improvements in survival will lead to enhanced profits. (The root of this evil is greed! They go after your cancer or after your money?)
  • … generally priced so high that the choice is between bankruptcy or declining treatment except for the wealthy.
  • The results discussed above are consistent with those presented in 2004 by Morgan et al14. Based on reports from Australia between 1992 and 1997, the contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was 2.3% whereas in the US it was 2.1%. These results suggest that over this period in these two countries chemotherapy made little contribution to cancer survival. (Yes, they tell you … chemo will give 60% chance, 99% chance, bla, bla …the Australian showed chemo is only 2 or 3% effective).
  • Furthermore, not much appears to haves changed between 1992 and 2014 from the patient’s perspective. It is important to note that we are talking about cancers that involve solid tumors. (Why change or improve? As it is – the drug companies are happy, hospitals and doctors are happy! And patients believe and trust them!)
  • BOTTOM LINE: When offered one of the new “wonder” chemotherapeutic drugs, it is important to ascertain the actual expected life extension in order to weigh this against the side effects. Trivial life extensions are sufficient to gain regulatory approval and allow patients to be told the treatment will extend their life. Unless carefully qualified, such an approach appears unethical.



Using Emotions of Fear or Hope to Sell Cancer Treatments

Our website, has this opening sentences:

CANCER ! Don’t panic ! Haste is from the Devil ~ Arab saying.

Why do you visit this website? We believe you are seeking information to enable you or your loved ones to make certain decisions about his/her cancer. Our advice is: Read as much as possible. Gather information from different sources. Cast your net wider and read what others from different disciplines have to say about the same subject. Get out of the box and view your problem in a different light.

Often, in the face of fear, hopelessness and panic we forget to use our commonsense. Calm down. A decision made in haste or under pressure is never a good decision. Remember, you don’t get cancer just only yesterday.

When we go to the hospital, we go with full faith and trust. We believe that the doctors have our best interests in their hearts – after all,  medicine is a noble profession! Unfortunately medicine has morphed into something else today!

The treatment of disease is not a science … but a thriving industry ~ Sir James Barr, Vice President, British Medical Association.

Physicians are called to service, to put patients’ good above our own. That’s a very spiritual calling. But with … making medicine a business, we’re … losing that sense of purpose and meaning ~ Christina Puchalski, professor of medicine, George Washington University. Reader’s Digest Sept. 2001.

People go where the money is, and you’d like to believe it’s different in medicine, but it’s really no different in medicine. When you start thinking of oncology as a business, then all these decisions make sense ~ Dr. Robert Geller, oncologist. New York Times, 12 June 2007 by Alex Beresen.

On the morning of 31 May 2014, I woke up to read the following titles in the internet! It is sad. But this is the reality of the medical industry! Please read these …

1. Cancer Ads Focus On Emotion, Not Facts: Are Consumers Being Misled About Treatment Options?

  • Advertisements released by U.S. cancer centers in magazines and on TV may be delivering the wrong message.
  • The grueling battle with cancer is one that many people undergo with little knowledge already at-hand. Popular outlets such as TV and magazines may prove unhelpful in that regard … these ads focus more on emotion than on facts.
  • Consumers gain little information about treatment costs, risks, or even its benefits in concrete, quantitative terms.
  • If the ads were anything to go by, the data suggests that patients would hope for survival rather than evaluate their chances. 

2. Analysis Shows Advertising by Cancer Centers Frequently Evokes Hope and Fear, but Provides Little Information.

  • Advertisements frequently promoted cancer therapy with emotional appeals that evoked hope and fear, while rarely providing information about risks, benefits, costs, or insurance availability. The researchers suggest that the ads may lead patients to pursue care that is either unnecessary or unsupported by scientific evidence.
  • Pursuit of unnecessary tests or treatment may … expose patients to avoidable risks and contribute to increasing costs.

3. Nine of 10 cancer center ads use emotional fluff to attract patients, with little mention of success rates, risks or cost.

Cancer centers and hospitals are competing for your business …. Many cancer charities use the same methods to raise money, which I discuss in my most popular video.

4. Cancer Center Ads Use Emotion, Promise Cure.

  • In their advertisements to the general public, cancer centers in the US use emotional appeals that evoke hope and fear, and rarely provide information about risks, benefits, costs … The approach may lead to unrealistic expectations and inappropriate treatments, it warns.

Emotional appeals were a cornerstone of most ads …. Most stressed survival or potential for cure rather than comfort, quality of life, or patient-centered care.

5.  Study: Cancer ads tug at heartstrings, leave out caveats.

  • Advertisements for cancer centers are inflated with emotions, but fail to disclose the fine print….
  • A systematic content analysis of these ads found that the content is sharply directed at a would-be patient’s heartstrings:
  • 85% made emotional appeals to consumers
    b.  61% used language about hope, extension of life, or a cure
    c.  52% touted innovative, or advanced technology or treatments
    d. 30% evoked fear by mentioning death, fear, or loss.
  • Noticeably missing from most of the TV and magazine ads is information about the risks, scientific-supported benefits and cost:
  • a.  2% disclosed the risks of the cancer treatment
    b.  5% mentioned cost of treatment
  • Emotion-based advertisement is a powerful means of persuasion and potentially harmful to the consumer.

6. Cancer Center Advertisements Focus on Emotional Appeals. 

MedicalResearch: What should clinicians and patients take away from your report? 

Dr. Schenker: Cancer center advertisements are increasingly common.  I think it is important for clinicians and patients to be aware of the focus on survival and potential cure in these advertisements, as well as the use of emotional appeals.  I would encourage patients to seek more complete and balanced sources of information – and to talk with a trusted physician – when facing important decisions about their cancer care.

The above comments came about as a result of research conducted by Vater et al and published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, 27 May 2014,  What Are Cancer Centers Advertising to the Public?: A Content Analysis.

A total of 102 cancer centers placed 409 unique clinical advertisements in top media markets in 2012. They found out that the:

  • Advertisements promoted treatments (88%) more often than screening (18%) or supportive services (13%).
  • Benefits of advertised therapies were described more often than risks (27% vs. 2%) but were rarely quantified (2%).
  • Few advertisements mentioned coverage or costs (5%).
  • Emotional appeals were frequent (85%), evoking hope for survival (61%), describing cancer treatment as a fight or battle (41%), and inducing fear (30%).
  • Nearly one half of advertisements included patient testimonials, which were usually focused on survival, rarely included disclaimers (15%), and never described the results that a typical patient may expect. 

The Journal’s editorial weighed in with more comments:

  • In her classic essay, Illness as Metaphor, Susan Sontag suggested that the negative metaphor and myths surrounding cancer increase the suffering of patients.
  • Vater and colleagues ….found that … benefits of advertised therapies were emphasized more often than risks, and specific data were rarely given.
  • Appeals were largely emotional rather informational, sometimes seemed to equate treatment with cure and most often focused on survival rather than comfort or quality of life.
  • The authors suggest that the focus may contribute to unrealistic expectations about treatment benefits among patients with cancer … and may even lead to inappropriate treatments.

Almost every day I have people writing or coming to me asking for help about their cancer. This is my advice, no matter who you go to – medical doctor or alternative practitioner.

If you are asked to undergo any treatment, ask the following questions first (don’t be led by the nose):

a. Can the treatment cure your cancer?

b. If the answer is “Yes”, better think a million times before you take the recommended path! My experience shows there is no such thing as a cure!

c. If you are told you have a 60 percent chance of success, make sure that you understand what this percentage means to you. Know that only 6 out of 10 patient succeed! Success may not mean anything! What is it, cure? Know that that this statistics may not apply to you at all. Six succeeded but how sure that you belong to the 6 and not the 4 who failed?

d. Patients tell me that often they get these answers when they ask about their cancer of cure: Ask God!  or  We shall try and see. Such answers imply that you are in the game of luck, not science anymore.

e. Another favourite answer is, No cure, but can prolong life. Ask, prolong life for how long? Some drugs only prolong life by a few days, a few weeks or a few months, rarely years!

f. Even if the treatment prolongs life, it comes with a great cost in terms of side effects and money. Decide, if the extra time of being alive (but ended up being a vegetable) is worth it?

g. Ask about the side effects of the treatment. Very often the “bad effects” are toned down! Some don’t want to even tell you about them! It is wise to visit the oncology ward of the hospital and see for yourself  (and ask) those who have undergone the treatments. Check about treatment by reading what others say in the internet.

h. Ask about the total cost of the treatment. It is foolish to proceed with the treatment half way and then found later that you don’t have to enough money to complete the journey!


by Yeong Sek Yee & Khadijah Shaari

Yes, the rich and famous (and insured) do die faster when they have cancer…more from the collateral damage due to the conventional (and scientifically proven?) cancer treatments than from the original cancer itself. A classic example is the sad story of Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis who was diagnosed with Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma in January 1994 and died in May 1994, just barely 5 months after diagnosis.

In the best-seller, HOW WE DO HARM, Dr Otis Brawley, an oncologist and Vice-President of the American Cancer Society, bluntly stated that….”If you are rich and insured, you face another menace. 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. “

Below is a list of 15 (there are many, many more) rich and famous personalities who have succumbed to cancer and the average period from the date of diagnosis to death is less than 2 years. How is it that the scientifically proven/tested conventional cancer treatments did not help them? Did their cancer treatments come along with excessive collateral damage to their body system or were their cancers just too aggressive?

Likewise, you may remember that Malaysia’s most famous and leading oncologist, the late Dr Albert Lim, succumbed to prostate cancer on March 8th 2013 after less than a year of scientifically tested cancer treatments. He had metastasis to his pelvic area, liver and lungs as well. Was there excessive collateral damage or was the prostate cancer too aggressive??



Jo Ann was a US Republican Congresswoman for Virginia and was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2005. She underwent chemotherapy treatments and a mastectomy. In early 2007, she suffered a recurrence. When the cancer returned, she underwent chemotherapy again. Jo Ann died on Oct 6, 2007.

Summary Point—From diagnosis to death: 2 years


Linda McCartney, wife of Paul McCartney died in April 1998, less than three years after it was announced that she was treated for breast cancer. Although her chemotherapy treatments had seemed to have her cancer in check, she took a turn for the worse in March 1998 when the disease spread to her liver.

Summary Point—From diagnosis to death: Less than 3 years


Heather was the wife of Darren Clarke, a PGA Golfer. She died in August 2006 after a two year battle with breast cancer that had spread to her bones and liver. She was treated at the Royal Marsden Hospital in London.

Summary Point—From diagnosis to death: 2 years


Miriam, a well-known US cartoonist was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2001 at the age of 43. Three years later, the cancer had spread to her brain and she died at age 48.

Summary Points—a) From diagnosis to recurrence: 3 years  b) From diagnosis to death: 5 years 


Elizabeth Edwards, wife of John Edwards (a US presidential candidate) was initially diagnosed with breast cancer in 2004 and was treated with a combination of chemotherapy, surgery and radiation. In March 2007, a recurrence was discovered after she cracked a rib and a subsequent X-ray showed spots on another rib, on the other side of the chest.

Summary Point—From diagnosis to bone metastasis: Less than 3 years.                            


In July 1998, King Hussein was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma (NHL) and immediately underwent chemotherapy at MAYO Clinic in US. He was treated there for six months and returned to Jordan in January 1999.

In late January 1999, King Hussein returned to MAYO after his doctors found evidence that the lymphatic cancer had recurred. King Hussein underwent two bone marrow transplants with cells from his younger brother and sister (in December 1998 and January 1999).

In February 1999, King Hussein returned to Jordan for palliative care and subsequently passed away on February 7, 1999.

Summary Points—a) From diagnosis to recurrence: 6 months  b) From diagnosis to death: 7 months. 


Freddy Fender, singer of hits like “Before the Next Teardrop Falls” and “Wasted Days and Wasted Nights” was diagnosed with lung cancer (two lemon-sized tumors) in January 2006. He underwent chemotherapy but later decided to stop treatment because of severe effects on his body. Following Fender’s initial round of chemo, he had a PET scan which showed that the tumors had shrunk, but also revealed that he had nine other tumors. Freddy Fender died on October 14 2006.

Summary Point—From diagnosis to death: 9 months. 


On August 11, 2006, Suzanne Pleshette was treated for lung cancer at Cedars-Sinai Medical Centre and the hospital claimed that the cancer was the size of “a grain of sand” when it was found during a routine x-ray, that the cancer was “caught very much in time,” that she was receiving chemotherapy as an outpatient. She was later hospitalized for a pulmonary infection and developed pneumonia, causing her to be hospitalized for an extended period ……as part of her treatment, a part of her lungs was removed… Pleshette died in January 19, 2009of respiratory failure.

Summary Point—From diagnosis to death: 1 year 5 months


Dan Fogelberg, a singer and songwriter, discovered he had advanced prostate cancer in 2004. He underwent hormonal therapy and achieved a partial remission but failed to completely eliminate the disease. Dan subsequently died on December 15, 2007.

Summary Point—From diagnosis to death: 3 years


Pavarotti, opera singer was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in July 2006 and required emergency surgery to remove the tumor. On September 5, 2007, Italy’s AGI news agency reported that Luciano Pavarotti’s health had deteriorated and the singer was in a “very serious condition”. He was reported to be in and out of consciousness multiple times, suffering kidney failure. He finally passed away on September 6, 2007.

Summary Points—From diagnosis to death: 11 months 

11) DANA REEVE, 44

Dana Reeve, wife of Christopher Reeve (Superman), was diagnosed with lung cancer in August 2005 and passed away on March 6, 2006.

Summary Point—From diagnosis to death: 7 months only 

12) TONY SNOW, 51

Tony Snow, a White House spokesman, was treated for colon cancer in 2005 at which time his colon was removed and subsequently underwent six months of chemotherapy. In March 2007, doctors determined that the cancer had spread to his liver. He died in July 2008.

Summary Points: a)   From surgery/chemotherapy to liver metastasis: 1 ½ years  b)   From surgery /chemotherapy to death: 2 ½ years


Michael Landon was the star in the hit series “Little House on the Prairie” and “Bonanza”. On April 5, 1991 he was diagnosed with inoperable pancreatic cancer that had spread to his liver and lymph nodes. He underwent three sessions of chemotherapy but subsequently died on July 1, 1991.

Summary Point—From diagnosis to death: 2 months 


The Archbishop fell ill in June 9, 2006 and medical tests showed that he suffered from advanced cancer in the LARGE INTESTINE (COLON) and an unrelated malignant growth in the liver. A first operation to remove the intestinal cancer was deemed successful but later a liver transplant in the US was abandoned after discovery that the liver cancer has spread. The Archbishop passed away in January 2008.

Summary Point—From diagnosis to death: 1 ½ years 


Dr Martin Abeloff, an international authority on the treatment of breast cancer and chief oncologist and director of the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Centre at John Hopkins University for the past 15 years, died of leukemia on September 14 2007. His leukemia, a form that is sometimes slow to grow, was diagnosed a year before that (i.e. approx September 2006).

Summary Point—From diagnosis to death: 1 year 

In his book, Dr Otis Brawley revealed a secret: Wealth in America (and elsewhere as well) is no protection from getting lousy care…in fact, wealth can increase your risk of getting lousy care.

Do you fancy getting some collateral damage?



Yeong Sek Yee & Khdijah Shaari

On June 05 2003, The New York Times published a short article written by Tom Nesi, a former director of public affairs at the drug company Bristol-Myers Squibb.  The article was strangely entitled “False Hope in a Bottle.” Curious, we decided to read further. Interestingly, we came across the book “HOPE or HYPE” by Dr Richard Deyo, MD and a Professor at the University of Washington in Seattle who described the story as “Exaggerating Benefits.” The story below is summarised based on the New York Times article and Dr Deyo’s story (read pages 45/46 of the book)

Tom Nesi described his wife, Susan, who was 52 when she was found to have a highly malignant brain cancer. They were told that the average survival with this condition was about eleven months, but they hoped for more. For about a year, Susan had been offered numerous medications, including, in the latter stages of her illness, Iressa, which was just approved by the Food and Drug Administration despite limited data about its effectiveness.

They sought care from a prestigious medical centre that offered several innovative treatments. One, called a Glidel wafer, is a dime-sized wafer that is implanted in the brain when the tumor is surgically removed. The goal was to deliver chemotherapy directly to the tumour site. The Nesis were told that this would extend Susan’s life, on average, about two months.

In the ensuing months, Susan underwent 3 brain operations and 6 hospitalizations. After the third operation, she was almost totally paralysed and unable to speak or eat. In her final months, she required two weeks in a critical care center, a full time home health aide, a feeding tube and electronic monitor, home hospital equipment, occupational therapists, social workers and medication. The costs for her care were around US $ 200,000.

As Susan lived 3 months longer than average; many doctors described the innovative treatment as a success. After the disastrous third operation, her surgeon told Tom: “We have saved your wife’s life….we have given you the ability to spend more quality time with your loved one.” Two weeks later, sustained by the feeding tube, Susan wrote on a notepad, “Depressed…no more…please.”

But according to the medical profession, the experimental treatment had worked. Susan lived almost three months longer than the average patient with glioblastoma. Somewhere in some computer database, Susan’s experimental regimen will be counted a success. She was a ”responder.” And therein lies the terrible truth behind the approval of ”miracle drugs” on the basis of ”tumor shrinkage” or ”extended days.” Susan’s life was extended. But at what cost?

Tom Nesi then faced a decision as to whether to stop the feeding tube and withhold liquids. He concluded his story by noting, “I think we need to ask ourselves whether offering terminal patients limited hope of a few more months is really beneficial. The question is not whether days are extended, but in what condition the patient lives and at what emotional and financial costs”

This is a story of well-meaning doctors (?) and a desperate patient. The presumption of both parties must have been that new technology could only help. As usual, the bias was to do something, to be aggressive. In the end, the treatment may be worse than the disease itself.

In many such cases, doctors tend to see only the good side of their interventions. They often dismiss, discount, or are wholly unaware of the downsides, which often diminish quality of life. And although new treatments often claim great benefits, we need to critically ask what the benefits are, and what we are giving up in order to have them.

FOOTNOTE: To Tom Nesi, chemotherapy is likened to FALSE HOPE IN A BOTTLE but to the late Senator Hubert Humphrey, who had bladder cancer, the chemotherapy that he endured for 1 year before he died was described (by him) as “bottled death.”  When diagnosed, he was treated with radiation after which his physician Dr Wilfred Whitmore, M.D. declared, “As far as we are concerned, the Senator is cured” Despite the cure declaration, they began treating the senator with chemotherapy. Shortly after the treatment started, Senator Humphrey regretted and called chemo “bottled death.” 

(Humphrey was the 38th Vice President of the USA from 1965 to 1969 and passed away in January 1978 at age 66).

We would like to end this article with a very brutal statement by Dr Charles Huggins, MD who was awarded the 1966 Nobel Prize for Physiology/ Medicine. As a physician, physiologist and cancer researcher at the University of Chicago, he is no quack doctor when he described chemotherapy:

  • ”There are worse things than death. One of them is chemotherapy” 

For those who have undergone chemotherapy treatment, please do share with the rest of the world what your thoughts are on this subject.

We welcome your comments.




(Read story about Senator Hubert Humphrey and bladder cancer treatment)

3)   THE CANCER ODYSSEY by Margaret Brennan Bermel, MBA,

(Read about Dr Charles Huggins, MD)











Given honest answers … about surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy … the chances are high that the patients will “run away” from them!

YB is a 52-year old lady. About three and a half years ago she was diagnosed with breast cancer and had a mastectomy in Kuala Lumpur. It was a triple negative tumour. YB went to Singapore for follow up treatments. She received 6 cycles of chemo using FEC. Then she had 12 more cycles of chemo using Taxol and Carboplatin. No radiation was indicated.

When YB started chemo, she also took our herbs and took care of her diet. The side effects she suffered was much less compared to others. She was alright after the chemo treatment.

Unfortunately things did not turn out right. YB took a trip home to Kuala Lumpur (she was staying in Singapore) to visit relatives. She felt dizzy and started to vomit. Her condition deteriorated. Whenever she moved her head, she would feel dizzy or had severe headaches and would start to vomit.  She had to lie down. As long as she did not move her head, she was okay.

YB did a CT scan and MRI. There were tumours in her brain.

YB’s daughter wrote: 11 January 2014.

Dear Dr Chris,

My mother has a relapse of her cancer to the brain. MRI shows 3 lesions in her brain. One of them is approximately 3 cm which caused swelling and subsequently dizziness, vomiting and headache. Meanwhile, she’s been given steroid to reduce the swelling. We are planning to see you right after the full report is out.

12 January 2014::

Dear Dr Chris,

CT scan result is out and it seems that the primary tumor is from the left lung. However, my mom has not suffered any symptoms or difficulties with breathing.

What would you do if she was your mother and given the following details?

1. The neurosurgeon suggested surgery to remove the big tumour in her brain. According to him,  the two small tumours cannot be removed  surgically and YB has to undergo radiotherapy. Surgery would cost SGD6,500 and radiation cost SGD 2,000 to 3,000 (foreigner’s rate. Singapore citizen pay much less).

2. Can surgery cure her brain cancer? The surgeon said, NO, the tumour will recur. Because of that YB has to go for radiation. Whatever  it is the family was told that YB will eventually die.

3. Did the doctor indicate how long your mom could survive? The surgeon said this,

a. If patient does nothing and is only on steroid, she has 2 months to live.

b. If patient undergoes chemotherapy and radiotherapy, she has 6 to 7 months to live.

c. If patient undergoes surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy, she has 6 to 7 months plus 3 months.

According to the surgeon these are based on statistics and also on the assumption the surgery goes not well without any complications.

What does the family want to do now? Everybody in the family decided to give up further medical treatment. They would rather go on herbs.

Did the doctor give you such information out front? No. We have to ask questions after questions and we get answers bit by bit. Nothing is laid out neatly like the above.


Bravo to patient empowerment!  For you to make a decision you need honest answers. You do not get honest answers if you dare not ask! So patients, learn how to ask questions. Don’t just be satisfied with just an answer! Ask and ask, dig and dig until you are satisfied.  This is because it is your life and you have to bear the consequences of that intervention not your doctors.

After you get the answers, use your common sense to make your decision. Follow what your heart says.

It seems very clear. If doctors give honest answers … about surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy … the chances are high the patients will “run away”!

What would you do if you are told that chemotherapy spreads and makes cancer more aggressive?

What would you do if you are told the following about radiotherapy?

  • Radiation makes cancer more aggressive. 
  • Radiation reprogrammed less malignant breast cancer cells into Induced Breast Cancer Stem Cells (iBCSCs). This explains radiotherapy actually enriches the tumor population with higher levels of treatment-resistant cells.  Researchers UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center said radiation treatment killed half of the tumor cells  treated. The surviving cells are resistant to treatment and become iBCSCs. They were up to 30 times more likely to form tumors than the non-irradiated breast cancer cells. 
  • Radiation gives a the false appearance that the treatment is working, but actually increases the ratio of highly malignant to benign cells within that tumor, eventually leading to treatment-induced death of the patient.


by Yeong Sek Yee & Khadijah Shaari

One night, while browsing the Internet, we came across an article (dated August 2013) that really threw us off the chair. The article that stunned us, but which has not been reported in the mainstream media, can be viewed at the following link:

Cancer doctor gives needless chemo in US 35 m fraud....says prosecutors.


As we search further, we came across a more detailed article of the same subject published in MEDPAGE, a medical news portal which can be read at the following link:

Physician Gave Chemo to Patients without Cancer, Feds say


Briefly, in August 2013 Oncologist Dr Farid Fata was arrested for allegedly having scammed US$35 million from Medicare over a two-year period. The following are the main points in the allegations against Dr Farid:

  • Deliberately misdiagnosed patients as having cancer to justify unnecessary cancer treatment,
  • Deliberately misdiagnosed patients without cancer to justify expensive testing
  • Administered chemotherapy unnecessarily to patients who were in remission,
  • Administered chemotherapy to end-of-life patients who will not benefit from the treatment,
  • Fabricated other diagnoses such as anemia and fatigue to justify unnecessary hematology treatments,
  • Unnecessarily distributed controlled substances to patients,
  • Administered chemotherapy to patients who had other serious medical conditions that required immediate treatment before being permitted to go to the hospital.

You can read more of Dr Farid Fata’s case (or verify the authenticity of this article) when you google CHEMOTHERAPY FRAUD or just DR FARID FATA or watch the following videos on YouTube:

1)   Michigan Oncologist Accused of Giving “Unnecessary Chemotherapy to cancer patients”


2)   Cancer doctor deliberately misdiagnoses patients


As at 2 October 2013, Dr Farid Fata is still in prison after his US $ 9 million bond has been revoked pending trial. He faces a 20 year jail sentence.

In December 2012, there was another fraudulent chemotherapy case similar to the above Dr Farid Fata case…read link below:

1)   Oncologist Dr. Meera Sachdeva gets 20 years for Medicare fraud


In this case, this is how oncologist Dr Meera Sachdeva defrauded cancer patients at her cancer center –The Rose Cancer Center in Summit, Jordan, USA:

·         Syringes were re-used and different patients’ chemotherapy drugs were drawn from the same bag.

·         Chemotherapy drugs were diluted,

·         Use chemotherapy drugtreatments after their expiration date,

  • Submitted claims for chemotherapy services that were supposedly given while she was out of the country,

Dr Meera has been sentenced to a 20–year jail term. You can read more of Dr Meera Sachdeva by just googling her name or watch the following YouTube videos:

1)   Summit doctor sentenced for cancer drug fraud.


2)   Two plead guilty in chemotherapy fraud case


 And there is yet another chemo fraud case that can blow your brains to pieces….watch the video below:

Chemo drugs diluted

Concluding comments:

Are these the only “isolated” cases or are these just the “tip” of the iceberg? To be diagnosed with cancer is traumatizing enough…but to be cheated by your oncologist/doctor is like rubbing a ton of salt into a big wound. Don’t you think so?

If you have undergone chemotherapy treatment, you may have some comments/experience to share with the rest of the world. Your comments may help to save some fellow cancer patients.


If you would like to blow your brains further, read the following:

1)   How We Do Harm…this book is written by  oncologist Dr Otis Webb Brawley (also chief Medical and scientific officer and Executive Vice President of the American Cancer Society)…the book gives a detail description how cancer patients are mislead and defrauded into unnecessary treatments.

2)   FraudChemotherapy

3)   Chemotherapy Fraud: Is This Fraud Too Big Even For 60 Minutes?

4)   Article: The Cancer Business

5)   The Cancer Report

  • or YouTube at :

6)   Burzynski: Cancer Is Serious Business

7)   National Cancer Institute report admits millions have been falsely

treated for ‘cancer’

8)     Millions Wrongly Treated for ‘Cancer,’ National Cancer Institute Panel Confirms



by Yeong Sek Yee & Khadijah Shaari

Allow us to share with you the sad news of the recent demise of a close relative who was diagnosed with breast in December 2011.  To us, this is a classic case of a lady who did not die because of the breast cancer – she died due to the breast cancer treatments that she diligently underwent since diagnosis.

This 65-year old lady was a very staunch and caring Christian and very much loved and admired by her siblings, relatives and friends.  Perhaps her weak point in her journey with cancer is her unquestioning loyalty to her doctors/oncologist (her son is also a medical doctor).  From Day One, she listened very faithfully to her oncologist who advised her not to consume antioxidants, herbs or other complementary treatments as these will “clash” with her chemotherapy and subsequent radiotherapy, and hence the efficacy of her conventional treatments will be compromised.

Briefly, in December 2011, when she was diagnosed with a 3.8 cm lump in her left breast, she was told by an oncologist (in Singapore) that the lump is too big for surgical removal.  She was then advised to have at least 8 sessions of chemotherapy “to shrink the tumour” before surgery could be performed.  She followed the doctor’s advice and underwent chemotherapy during the whole of 2012 – 6 sessions of EC (Epirubicin + Cyclophosphamide) followed by 5 sessions of docetaxel, which ended in January 2013.

Come January 2013, instead of the tumour shrinking, the condition of her breast became more inflamed, with a few more new lumps appearing at the sides the breast. She was then advised by her hometown oncologist to consider radiotherapy.  So she came to KL for that purpose as the radiotherapy machine in her hometown was not working.  Whilst in KL she consulted with two prominent breast surgeons, who advised that (as at January 2013), surgery was definitely not an option based on the condition of the breast after 11 sessions of chemotherapy. She subsequently did 33 sessions of radiotherapy from January to March 2013, with the intention of shrinking the five lumps.  Again, while she was undergoing radiotherapy she was warned by her oncologist and radiologist not to take any herbs or antioxidants until everything is over.  At the end of the 33 sessions she was referred back to her hometown oncologist, with a report that the cancer has metastasized to her bone.

Back in her hometown, her oncologist recommended a new drug, Eribulin, which was only currently available in Singapore (as at April 2013).  She flew to Singapore and bought 4 doses of the drug from an oncologist there at the cost of S$8,000 per dose.  However, after three jabs, her hometown’s oncologist determined that Eribulin was not suitable for her.  He subsequently recommended Cisplatin + Gemzar and she underwent four cycles of this, the last one being around mid-August, after which she was told that further chemotherapy would not work for her.  She was totally devastated.  However, as some form of hope for her to cling on, she was given oral Xeloda.

All the while during her chemotherapy treatments in 2012, radiotherapy and further chemo in 2013, this tough lady was in pain most of the time and the pain became more and more intense in the months of April through August 2013.   From April 2013 her lungs started accumulating fluids…this is usually a confirmation of metastasis to the lungs. In the month of August till her demise on Sunday, 25th August, she had to be on oxygen most of the time (in addition to morphine).

She did try some herbal treatment off and on in between her chemotherapy/radiotherapy sessions in 2013.  Obviously this could not help her much as by that time her body was a total wreck.  Further, she only changed her diet in 2013. During 2012 she “ate anything she liked” as advised by the oncologist in Singapore and from her hometown.

When I attended her wake on 27th August 2013, the first thing that her eldest son said to me was “Uncle, see – only 19 months!”  Of course her oncologist and other doctors attributed this to her triple negative breast cancer which is supposed to be an aggressive form of breast cancer. Anyway, it is always about the cancer being aggressive, and never about the toxicities and ineffectiveness of the conventional cancer treatments which is always marketed and touted as evidence-based, scientifically tested, etc.

Lately, we noticed a new current trend in breast cancer treatment very similar to this case –more and more patients are advised to have pre-surgery chemotherapy – to shrink the lump before surgery.  We are very perplexed by this – why do you need to shrink the lump first before surgery when the breast, an “external” organ, can be wholly removed by mastectomy?  We know of a lady who recently had a 5 cm lump removed by lumpectomy and is recovering well and she has refused any form of chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

This trend of pre-surgery chemotherapy first is a huge business (if you catch my drift) for the medical/cancer establishment.  This unfortunate lady paid RM80,000 for the EC and Docetaxel in 2012.  Imagine how much the drug companies/and oncologists would make if they can persuade a million ladies to do so annually, world-wide.

It is mind-boggling, and the damage to the body, and the suffering, is also mind-boggling.

Just to conclude, this is the lady’s 19-months timeline summary:

a)    December 2011 – diagnosis

b)    December 2012 – commenced EC x 6 sessions followed by Docetaxel x 5 sessions

c)     January to March 2013 – 33 sessions of radiotherapy + oral cyclosphomide.

d)    April/May 2013 – 3 sessions of Eribulin

e)     July to August 2013 – 4 sessions of Cisplatin/Gemzar.  When Cisplatin/Gemzar was stopped after the 3rd session, she was given Xeloda

f)     25th August 2013 – passed away.

Undoubtedly, she has found peace with the Lord now but you do not have to follow her timeline. Follow Olivia Newton John’s cancer journey….she was diagnosed with breast cancer in 1992, did one year of chemotherapy and complemented her treatments with good nutrition, herbs, homeopathy, acupuncture and practiced meditation and prayer….and Olivia is still very much alive today (22 years later)… out for her more detailed story soon.


Not many MDs, least of all an oncologist, would dare to break ranks from the rules of the medical establishment and especially from the clutches of Big Pharma in the present day cancer industry. One exception is Dr Otis Webb Brawley, MD, and oncologist and the Chief Medical and Scientific Officer and Executive Vice President of the American Cancer Society.

As we were reading the 2011 best seller in America “HOW WE DO HARM” by Dr Brawley, we were shocked to read in Chapters 6 and 7 that Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents (ESAs) causes tumour promotion i.e. the anemia-building drugs seemed to be encouraging tumors to grow.

How we do harm

 What Are ESAs?

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents are one of the most common drugs used to treat anemia i.e. these are medication that increase the production of red blood cells. For a brief introduction, go to:

The doctor would give you ESA or a blood boosting injection if you do not enough blood after a chemo treatment. They use “the red juice” to fight anemia by stimulating red blood cell production and “the white juice” to fight neutropenia, a deficiency of white blood cells.

If these ESAs or “hemoglobin-building” drugs are supposed to perform a useful function in overall cancer treatment, why then is Dr Brawley so vociferous against these drugs? He even mentioned that “these drugs stimulate cancer growth”

Let us examine some of the reasons:

  • The FDA approved the drugs for the treatment of anemia in cancer patients in 1993 based on data pooled from only 6 small studies that altogether enrolled a total of only 131 patients (page 76).
  • The 6 minuscule trials… asked only whether Procrit (one of the ESA drugs) had the ability to prevent blood transfusion. Not a shred of data said anything about “fatigue” or its opposite “strength” (page 77).
  • There were a lot of unanswered questions such as: was their anemia corrected? Did their underlying cancer recur? Did they die sooner? Did they face a higher risk of blood clots? (page 77).

Soon after hemoglobin-drugs were approved, a German radiation therapist named Michael Henke decided to test one of the fundamental tenets of his subspecialty: that patient with higher hemoglobin levels have better responses to radiation therapy. Henke believed in the connection between hemoglobin and response to radiation. However the study’s results didn’t come out the way Henke expected. The result of Henke’s study, which was initiated in 1997, was published in 2003. The study showed that patients who received the hemoglobin-building drug didn’t live as long as those on placebo. Also, the disease progressed more rapidly in patients receiving the drug. Henke concluded that he had encountered a biological phenomenon: the drug seemed to be encouraging tumors to grow (page 81).

In August 2003, researchers had to stop another study, the Breast Cancer Erythropoietin Survival Trial (BEST), when more women died on Procrit than on the control arm. In both the Henke trial and BEST trial, the survival curve showed an increased risk of death from cancer, which suggested something you don’t want to see in patients you are treating for cancer –  tumour growth (page 82).

In other words, pharmaceutical companies were promoting an untested therapy that was supposed to make patients feel better and stronger when, in fact, it caused stroke and heart attacks and in some cases made tumors grow (page 73).

According to Dr Brawley, FDA approved these drugs to reduce the risk of blood transfusion in patients with solid tumours treated with chemotherapy. That’s it. Not a word was said about “tiredness”, not a word about “cancer fatigue”

In Chapter 6, Red Juice and Chapter 7, Tumour Progression, Dr Brawley described how cancer patients are routinely “offered” hemoglobin-building drugs to even borderline anemia, a common side effect of cancer drugs. The drug companies manufactured a medical condition called “cancer fatigue” and nurses were trained to “suggest” “erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA)” to all patients undergoing chemotherapy – “the red juice” to fight anemia by stimulating red blood cell production and “the white juice” to fight neutropenia, a deficiency of white blood cells.

  • 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”
  • These drugs are still being prescribed routinely. According to Dr Brawley,” these ESA drugs were not used to cure disease or make patients feel better. They are used to make money for doctors and pharmaceutical companies at the expense of patients, insurance companies and taxpayers “(page 97)
  • Also the disease progressed more rapidly in patients receiving the drug (page 81) i.e. the drug seemed to be encouraging tumors to grow…this compound is a stimulant, a “tumor fertilizer”. A patient with active disease is more likely to suffer tumour progression: the more tumor you have, the more tumor there is to stimulate!! (page 97). 
  • Commenting further on ESA drugs, some doctors didn’t bother to check what the patient’s hemoglobin 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 anemia caused by cancer itself, as opposed to anemia caused by chemotherapy (page 78).

Besides Dr Brawley’s comments in the book, we searched further for sound scientific validation of ESAs causing tumor promotion. These are extracted from prominent sources like the FDA, Journal of Clinical Cancer Research, Annals of Oncology, British Journal of Cancer, PubMed Medline, Journal of Oncology Practice, etc. There are lots more. The following are some of the links you may be interested to read:

1)      THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION (FDA) of the US issued a Drug Safety Communication dated 26/2/2010 under the following title: “Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents (ESAs): Procrit, Epogen and Aranesp.”

In the article, the FDA warned that cancer patients using ESAs should understand the risks associated with the use of ESAs. These risks include:

  • ESAs may cause tumors to grow faster.
  • ESAs may cause some patients to die sooner.
  • ESAs may cause some patients to develop blood clots, and serious heart problems such as a heart attack, heart failure or stroke.

2)      In July 2011, THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANCER RESEARCH, in its journal, Clinical Cancer Research published an article entitled: The Role of Erythropoietin and Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents in Tumor Progression” It reported that:

  • Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) are used clinically for treating cancer-related anemia [chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA)].
  • Recent clinical trials have reported increased adverse events and/or reduced survival in ESA-treated cancer patients receiving chemotherapy, potentially related to EPO-induced cancer progression.

3)      THE EUROPEAN SOCIETY FOR MEDICAL ONCOLOGY in its journal, Annals of Oncology (2010) published the following guidelines: “Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in the treatment of anemia in cancer patients: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for use.” The lead author, Professor Schrijvers, although on the Advisory Board of Johnson and Johnson admitted the following:

  • The influence of ESAs on tumour response and overall survival in anemic cancer patients remains unclear. Several randomized trials have demonstrated decreased survival times and poorer loco-regional control or progression-free survival 
  • Other recent meta-analyses showed that ESAs increase and worsened overall survival when given to cancer patients.

4)      In September 2007, THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY published the following article in its Journal of Oncology Practice: “Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents: Continued Challenges” in which:

·         The FDA revised both the epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa product labels, with new “black box” warnings and expanded information on safety, tumor progression, and survival.

·         Additionally, the new warning states that ESAs are not indicated for patients with active malignant disease receiving neither chemotherapy nor radiotherapy.

5)      In March 2012, THE BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER (of the CANCER RESEARCH of UK) published several research studies done on the usage of ESAs and concluded that….”several trials have reported an association between ESA use and increased disease progression and/or mortality” The article is entitled: “Effects of erythropoietin receptors and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents on disease progression in cancer”

In another book, A WORLD WITHOUT CANCER, Dr Margaret Cuomo, a radiologist also stated that… “even drugs used to treat the side effects of chemotherapy have been linked to secondary cancers”. For example, patients who need medication to raise their white blood cell counts may be injected with granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), a substance normally found in the blood. Researchers observed that this doubled the risk of developing myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) or acute myelogenous leukemia (AML)… (page 69)



2)   In 2007, THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE (US) published the following article in its Journal (JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst Volume 99, Issue 3 pp. 196-205).…. “Acute Myeloid Leukemia or Myelodysplastic Syndrome Following Use of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factors during Breast Cancer Adjuvant Chemotherapy” The article concluded that….”the use of G-CSF was associated with a doubling in the risk of subsequent AML or MDS among the population that we studied”……

FOOTNOTE: In Malaysia, these ESAs (and G-CSF) are commonly referred to as “booster” or “booster jabs” and are generally given after the 3rd or 4th cycle of chemotherapy when the patient’s RBC, WBC, Platelets, Hemoglobin, etc are low. These booster jabs are costly…..and that is why patients are warned not to use cheaper and (safer) methods (because it will clash with the chemo drugs!!)


When a patient decides on chemotherapy treatment, he or she expects to be healed and not to have the cancer spread or suffer second malignancies shortly after completion of the scientifically tested and proven treatments. And to be given ESAs or G-CSFs which later promotes tumour growth isn’t it too much for the patients to bear? Is this a double bonus or a double whammy for the patients? (Please note we have not factored in the damaging side effects of radiotherapy into the above scenario).

We welcome your views.